Re: [Iasa20] Comments on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc4844-bis-01

[Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 6:59 PM Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
>
> On 09/02/2019 23:48, Richard Barnes wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Russ Housley <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Alissa:
> >>
> >> I think we want the hiring/firing of the RFC Series Editor to stay with
> >> the IAB, but the funding to stay with IASA.
> >>
> >
> > This is not a reasonable thing to ask.
>
> I'm way behind in being up to speed on this wg's stuff, so I
> may be off base here, but I reckon I strongly agree with Russ.
> The IAB are picked by the community and ought be the ones to
> hire a new RSE if one is needed. With no disrespect meant to
> trades-persons, I'd be fine with the hiring of electricians
> being handled internal to IASA; but not an RSE - the context
> here means those are utterly different.


When the IAB wants to take legal responsibility for the RSE contract, they
can control it.  If they don't, then they can't.

That doesn't mean they can't be extensively consulted, but they can't have
ultimate authority over the contract, since they aren't a party.

--Richard



>
> Cheers,
> S.
>
> PS: I'd have said the above even were I not an incoming IAB
> member and hope not to be involved in picking a new RSE whilst
> on the IAB:-)
>
> > One of the key driving factors for
> > this whole endeavor it makes no legal sense for an organization to
> delegate
> > its hiring / firing / contracting decisions to people external to that
> > organization.
> >
> > By all means, the IASA should work with the IAB on the RSE, but since the
> > IASA is ultimately the responsible party, it can't totally cede
> > responsibility.  The "operational oversight" text that's in there now
> seems
> > like it captures this accurately.
> >
> >
> >
> >> The decision whether the ED serves on the ROC should not be determined
> by
> >> this document.  If the IAB wants the ED to be part of RSOC, they can
> make
> >> that appointment.
> >>
> >> Perhaps it would be best to make this change:
> >>
> >> OLD:
> >>
> >>    The IASA is tasked with providing the funding for and operational
> >>    oversight of the RFC Editor.
> >>
> >> NEW:
> >>
> >>    The IASA is tasked with providing the funding for the RFC Editor.
> >>    The IETF Executive Director is tasked with overnight of contracts
> >>    and operational agreements related to the RFC Editor.
> >>
> >
> > I don't see how this accomplishes what you claim above.  The IETF ED is
> > part of the IASA.  And especially given that, the second sentence here is
> > really just micromanagement of the LLC.
> >
> > --Richard
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Russ
> >>
> >> On Feb 8, 2019, at 8:11 PM, Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Earlier this week the IAB discussed whether to
> >> put draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc4844-bis-01 out for community review. In
> reviewing
> >> it I felt there were some clarifications needed before it would be ready
> >> and the IAB thought the most appropriate path would be to bring those to
> >> the WG for resolution first.
> >>
> >> I haven’t started my AD review of 4071bis yet (hope to next week), but I
> >> think 4071bis has a problem in that the definition of “IASA” in that
> >> document is broken (it refers to the definition in 4071, which it
> itself is
> >> obsoleting). And until it is clear how we are defining “IASA,” I have
> >> trouble with statements such as the following from Section 3.3 in
> 4844bis:
> >>
> >> "The IASA is tasked with providing the funding for and operational
> oversight
> >> of the RFC Editor.”
> >>
> >> Is the RSOC part of IASA? It’s pretty hard to tell without a good
> >> definition of IASA, which we do not currently have IMO. (I think there
> is a
> >> further problem with the sentence above, which is that the funding comes
> >> from the LLC, and it would be better to be that specific.)
> >>
> >> While looking at Section 3.3, I don’t think this text belongs there
> since
> >> this document is about the RFC series and editor, not IASA generally:
> >>
> >> "The IETF LLC Board provides oversight of the IASA, and the IETF
> Executive
> >> Director is the chief actor for the IASA.”
> >>
> >> I also find lack of clarity between 4844bis Section 3 and 6635bis
> Section
> >> 3. For example, 4844bis says:
> >>
> >> "The IETF Executive Director works with the IAB to identify suitable
> persons
> >> or entities to fulfill the mandate of the RFC Editor.”
> >>
> >> While 6635bis says:
> >>
> >> "For all decisions that affect the RSE individually (e.g., hiring and
> firing),
> >> the RSOC prepares recommendations for the IAB, but the final decision is
> >> the responsibility of the IAB.”
> >>
> >> But under the current model (which I presume we plan to keep), the ED
> is a
> >> member of the RSOC. So does the ED work directly with the IAB? Or
> >> indirectly with the IAB through the RSOC? Or both?
> >>
> >> 4844bis also says:
> >>
> >> "The IETF Executive Director may define additional operational
> >> requirements and policies for management purposes to meet the
> >> requirements defined by the various communities.”
> >>
> >> I wonder if this is really consistent with what is envisioned in
> 6635bis.
> >>
> >> I also find it odd that the budget for an RSE search is discussed in
> >> 6635bis, while the budget for the RFC Editor function overall is
> discussed
> >> in 4844bis — is the separation meaningful? Since the LLC Board approves
> the
> >> whole IETF budget, presumably what 4844bis says about the RFC Editor
> budget
> >> applies to the search budget mentioned in 6635bis as well, but since
> it’s
> >> not explicit it isn’t totally clear.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Alissa
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> iasa20 mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > iasa20 mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20
> >
>