RSOC call, 2012-06-13

0. Agenda Bash

1. RSE Reports
   a. RFC Publication
   b. RSE Priorities & Projects
      i. Format discussion
      ii. Style Guide, parts 1 and 2

2. Budget Planning
   a. 2012 extension of 1 FTE editor
   b. What to submit to which involved party?
   c. Advice sought on project funding (RFP versus community volunteers)

3. SOW definitions
   a. see email from rse@rfc-editor.org "Question on roles and
definitions for the SOWs", 6/1/2012 @ 09:36 PDT

4. IETF 84

5. AOB

----

Attendees:
Heather Flanagan (RSE, scribe)
Olaf Kolkman
Bob Hinden
Alexey Melnikov
Nevil Brownlee
Ole Jacobsen
Ray Pelletier
Fred Baker
John Klensin

Apologies:
Joel Halpern


1. RSE Reports
   a. RFC Publication
view of SLA graph considered helpful

* (Bob) note that the graph is useful, might consider using green/yellow/red for graph

   b. RSE Priorities & Projects
      i. Format discussion

* (Heather) conversation seems to have paused on rfc-i, general consensus seems to be almost in reach for requirements, current trends is towards a constrained HTML, but that's not going to be to be easy to get agreement in specifics going forward - conversation should be interesting

* (John) Which HTML, since they are not interoperable?  (HF) Unclear at this time

      ii. Style Guide, parts 1 and 2

* (Heather) taking it in sections, posting to RSAG and editors, not posting for public comment yet 


2. Budget Planning
   a. 2012 extension of 1 FTE editor 

* (Ray) goes to IAOC on 21st of June

   b. What to submit to which involved party?

* (Heather) see Joel's note to RSOC on 10-June:

In light of the recent discussion about RSOC involvement in budget
planning for the RSE and RFC Functions, and the request for
clarification that the RSOC chair sent to the IAB, the IAB has
discussed the question.  The RSOC involvement in the budget process
should primarily be in terms of policy and should normally not be
involved in the financial side of RFC Editor's budget.  It's
involvement with the RFC Editor's budget should be at a high level and
should not be reviewing financial numbers.  Most policy issues that
relate to the budget can be discussed at the level of percent changes
to the budget and staffing levels.  The RSOC is responsible for RFC
Editor policy changes.  In some cases it may need access to what a
policy change might cost in order to fully evaluate a proposed policy
change.  In such cases, the RSOC should request, and the IAOC should
provide, a summary of that financial information.  The RSOC will treat
such information with appropriate care and confidentiality. 

Yours, 
Joel M. Halpern, representing the IAB

   c. Advice sought on project funding (RFP versus community volunteers)

Other comments on budget summary:

* still want a bit more detail

* the foreign language problem / author education issue is something John would like to see addressed somehow in someway, and didn't see it hitting the budget in terms of any projects; perhaps in a future budget?

* target next draft in July 

3. SOW definitions

   a. see email from rse@rfc-editor.org "Question on roles and
definitions for the SOWs", 6/1/2012 @ 09:36 PDT

RSE: the RSE is responsible for coordinating the RFC Production Center
and RFC Publisher budgets, Statements of Work and associated project
prioritization efforts, and vendor selection.  The RSE acts as point
person for communication regarding those areas to the Customer and/or
IAD.

IAD: the IAD is responsible for establishing and reviewing all changes
to the budget or contracts of the RFC Production Center and RFC
Publisher.

Vendor: currently AMS

Customer: Stream Managers of the Streams described in 5620bis

Recipient: propose to remove "Recipient" entirely

Community: propose to add where "Customer" currently seems to refer to
I* Community

Sent back to the list for further discussion

4. IETF 84
* RSOC dinner Wednesday
* RSAG / ISEB lunch on Tuesday
* RFC Ed / Stream Manager lunch on Wednesday
* RFC BoF has been approved

5. AOB