Network Working Group O. Kolkman, Ed.
Internet-Draft February 15, 2011
Intended status: Informational
Expires: August 19, 2011
RFC Editor: RSE consensus documentation
draft-kolkman-rse-2011-02
Abstract
This memo serves as a temporary placeholder for the documentation of
consensus around the role and responsibilities surrounding the RFC
Series Editor as developed on the rfc-interest list.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 19, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RSE 2011 February 2011
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. The RFC Series Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Executive Management of the Publication and Production
function. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Development of the RFC Publication series. . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Workload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. RSE oversight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. RSOC composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RSE 2011 February 2011
1. Introduction
This memo tries to cast what I believe the consensus to be in
language that is close to being the basis for text in 5620bis. This
is supposed to be (or quickly evolve into) the basis from which we
will develop job descriptions and write an update to RFC5620 [1].
In other words, once we converged this memo will be used as the basis
for other documents and is not intended to be published as RFC.
Editorial and other comments appear in [square brackets].
2. The RFC Series Editor
The RFC Series Editor(RSE) is an individual who assumes serval
responsibilities.
2.1. Executive Management of the Publication and Production function.
o With respect to the Publication and Production functions, the RSE
provides input to the IASA budget, statements of work, and manages
vendor selection processes. The RSE performs annual reviews of
the Production and Publication function which are then provided to
IASA.
o Vendor selection is done in cooperation with the streams and under
final authority of the IASA.
o Concretely:
* The RSE owns and develops the work definition (the SOW) and
manages the vendor search processes. The work definition is
created within the (budgetary) boundary condition that are
negotiated with IASA and takes into account the RSE's
requirements and community input.
* The RSE manages the evaluation process (the bids agains the
SOW) which leads to a recommendation to IASA
* Final vendor selection is done by the IASA in close
consultation with the RSE to ensure that contract terms and
other arrangements are consistent with the SOW, consistent with
the both RSE's and contractor's requirements to satisfy the
contract, and do not conflict with the role of the RSE.
o The IASA has the responsibility to approve the total RSE budget
(and the authority to deny it) The RSE has the responsibility to
manage all the series functions within that budget. It is assumed
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RSE 2011 February 2011
that there is a level of cooperation between RSE and IASA that
allows decisions by the IASA to be 'pro forma'. In case of
disagreement, the IAB will attempt to mediate the issue. If no
mutual agreement can be reached, the IAB will make the final
decision.
o When budgets have been assigned by IASA the RSE is responsible for
managing the RFC Editor to operate within those budgets.
o The RSE primaraly supervises the on-going performance of the
vendors whitout asserting operational responsibilities. However,
the RSE has operational responsibilities for issues that raise
above the responsibilities of the publication or publication
functions such as cross stream coordination of priorities and
other issues. When the RSE needs to take extra-budgetary or
out-of contract measures those actions will be coordinated with
IASA.
o Create documentation and structures that will allow for the RFC
Series' continuity when circumstances engender the need for the
execution of the publication and/or production functions by other
vendors.
For this type of responsibility the RSE is expected to cooperate
closely with the IASA and the various streams.
To prevent actual or apparent problems with conflicts of interest or
judgment, the RSE is barred from having any ownership, advisory, or
other relationship to the vendors executing the Publication or
Production functions except as specified elsewhere in this document.
If necessary, an exception can be made after public disclosure of
those relationships and with the explicit permission of the IAB and
IASA.
2.2. Development of the RFC Publication series.
In order to develop the RFC Publication series the RSE is expected to
develop a relationships with the Internet technical community. With
that community, the Editor is expected to engage in a process of
articulating and refining a vision for the Series and its continuous
evolution.
Concretely:
The RSE is responsible for the coordination of discussion on
Series evolution among the Series' Stream participants and the
broader Internet technical community.
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RSE 2011 February 2011
In time the RSE is expected to develop and refine a vision on
the technical specification series, as it continues to evolve
beyond the historical 'by engineers for engineers' emphasis;
and
its publication-technical environment: slowly changing in terms
of publication and archiving techniques; the communities that
produce and depend on the RFC Series. All of those communities
have been slowly changing to include significant multi-lingual
non-native-English populations.Some of them also have a primary
focus on the constraints and consequences of network
engineering, rather than a primary interest in the engineering
issues themselves.
The RSE will develop consensus versions of vision and policy
documents which will be approved by the RFC Series Oversight
Committee (RSOC, see Section 3).
For this type of responsibility the RSE cooperates closely with the
community and under oversight of the RSOC and thus ultimately under
oversight of the IAB.
Consensus is to hire someone with publication experience and grow
their knowledge of the community they will serve.
2.3. Workload
The job is expected to take on average half of an FTE (approx 20 hrs
per week) whereby the workload per week is expected to be near full
time during IETF weeks, be over 20 hours per week in the first few
months of the engagement, and higher during special projects.
3. RSE oversight
The IAB is responsible for oversight over the RFC Series.
In order to provide continuity over periods longer than the nomcom
appointment cycle and assure that oversight is informed through
subject matter experts the IAB will establish a group that implements
oversight for the IAB, the RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC).
The RSOC will act with authority delegated from the IAB: In general
it will be the RSOC that will approve consensus policy and vision
documents as developed by the RSE in collaboration with the
community.
In those general cases the IAB is ultimately responsible for
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RSE 2011 February 2011
oversight and acts as a body for appeal and resolution.
For all aspects that affect the RSE itself (e.g. hiring and firing)
the RSOC prepares recommendations for the IAB but final decision is
the responsibility of the IAB. For instance the RSOC would:
o perform annual reviews of the RSE and reports to the IAB.
o manage RSE candidate selection and advises the IAB on candidate
appointment (in other words select the RSE, subject to IAB
approval)
It is expected that such oversight by the IAB is a matter of due
diligence and that the reports and recommendations from the RSOC are
approached as if they are binding.
There is one aspect in which the RSOC will work with the IASA: the
renumeration of the RSE itself. The RSOC will propose a budget for
approval to the IASA.
The RSOC will be responsible to ensure that the RFC Series is run in
a transparent and accountable manner.
The RSOC shall develop and publish its own rules of order.
3.1. RSOC composition
The RSOC will operate as a Program of the IAB, with the IAB retaining
final responsibility. The IAB will delegate authority and
responsibility to the RSOC as appropriate and as RSOC and RSE
relationships evolve. Like other IAB Programs, the RSOC will include
people who are not current IAB members. The IAB will designate the
membership of the RSOC with the goals of preserving effective
stability, keeping it small enough to be effective, but large enough
to provide general Internet Community expertise, specific IETF
expertise, Publication expertise, and stream expertise. Members
serve at the pleasure of the IAB and are expected to bring a balance
between short and long term perspective. Specific input about, and
recommendations of, members will be sought from the streams, the
IASA, and the RSE.
The RSE and a person designated to represent the IASA will serve as
ex-officio members of the RSOC but either or both can be excluded
from its discussions if necessary.
4. References
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RSE 2011 February 2011
4.1. Normative References
4.2. Informative References
[1] Kolkman, O. and IAB, "RFC Editor Model (Version 1)", RFC 5620,
August 2009.
Author's Address
Olaf M. Kolkman (editor)
EMail: olaf@nlnetlabs.nl
Kolkman Expires August 19, 2011 [Page 7]