RSOC telcon, 11-July-2012

0. Agenda Bash

1. RSE Reports
   a. RFC Publication
   b. RSE Priorities & Projects
      i. Format discussion
      ii. Style Guide, parts 1 and 2
      iii. New Stream
      (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rse/wiki/doku.php?id=newstream)

2. Budget Planning and SoW status

3. IETF 84
   a. RFC Format BoF @ 10:30 PDT, Tuesday July 31
   b. RFC Editor hours: see http://www.rfc-editor.org/ietf.html

4. AOB

----
Notes
Attendees:
Alexey Melnikov
Fred Baker
Joel Halpern
John Klensin
Nevil Brownlee
Olaf Kolkman
Ray Pelletier

0. Agenda Bash

* (JCK) if we have time, discuss "sequencing relative to Style and other things" (See AOB)


1. RSE Reports
   a. RFC Publication

* Time in State for RFC Editor is still within our SLA, with monthly
SLA report showing all but a small number of docs taking longer than 6
weeks

* Expecting a push of publication prior to IETF 84

   b. RSE Priorities & Projects
      i. Format discussion

* a suggestion on how to handle rfc-i: enumerate the arguments that
have been made on either side in a neutral way to get people caught up
if they've gotten lost; a few general positions with the pro's and
con's listed, since there is no consensus

* success criteria must be separate from actual proposals (example,
thoughts about archival-ness are success criteria, not proposals)

      ii. Style Guide, parts 1 and 2

* In progress, with plans to release the RFC half of the Style Guide
after IETF 84, discuss at IETF 85

      iii. New Stream
      (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rse/wiki/doku.php?id=newstream)

* (Joel) We have another potential group (the Open Network Foundation)
interested in becoming another stream, or perhaps just publishing RFC;
the contact is coming through the IAB

* what is the argument for having a separate, new stream? a stream
would have to have a strong review process, IESG will still need to
check documents from new streams for conflicts

* concern about making the RFC just a general doc publisher

* it may be time to have the IAB and RSOC to create an FAQ on groups,
new streams, document publication paths

* who owns the organization of this? the RFC Editor or the IAB? this
should likely start throughout the RFC Ed

* John to put together an outline of what we might say here

2. Budget Planning and SoW status

* (Alexey) look at Jari's information on statistics and info on the
series (http://www.arkko.com/tools/allstats/alexeymelnikov.html)

* (Bob) to the extent we can be specific/detailed with what we're
asking for, so the IAOC can get the most detailed numbers possible,
would be helpful; need this as soon as possible

* (John) what's missing from the list is set of topics about improving
the input quality of documents for people who are not native speakers;
(Heather) because we have no immediate path forward, given what has
already been tried; this is an important issue, but unclear what the
next steps should be (which makes it hard to assign a dollar figure to
it)

3. IETF 84
   a. RFC Format BoF @ 10:30 PDT, Tuesday July 31
   b. RFC Editor hours: see http://www.rfc-editor.org/ietf.html

4. AOB

* sequencing relative to Style and other things

(JCK) simple editorial details which are rightly in the purview of the
RFC Ed staff are happening earlier in the process so they can avoid
intense conversation in last call; what is the expectation of the
streams that they should fix versus we should fix, who does the
editing; the foreign language is a portion of this - if the WG has to
sort out the poor language in order to get through last call; we have
tried the early editing, and that was either loved or hated; should
last call happen AFTER editing? now the community approves something
and then it goes through a process and changes and is published
without further community support - how is this community consensus?
there are checks and balances, but is it sufficient? right now, the
checks go through the AD, but not back to the community

* no obvious solution; at least raising awareness may help