Motivations for Recommendations
draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2-motivations-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Glenn Kowack | ||
| Last updated | 2010-12-19 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This memo provides the background and motivations for the recommendations made in draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2-overview-00. It represents the perspectives resulting from an individual managerial and analytical effort of nearly one year's duration. It contains a summary of the factors considered to be essential to the job of RFC Series Editor (RSE). This includes a summary of the work done as part of the RFC Editor, the differences between [RFC5620]and the [I-D.v2-overview] recommendations, a discussion of development work that should be done, and an assessment of the time needed to perform the RSE job. There is also a section listing and responding to questions surrounding the recommendations.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)