Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period

[Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>]

Five immediate large items:


0) The requirements for this position are pretty much indistinguishable 
from that of the RSE as stated in previous versions of the SOW.   I 
don't think that makes sense.  If this is simply a "we want to hire some 
short time to do the RSE position", then state that rather than using 
the figleaf of strategic and tactical.  I'm not saying you'll get 
community buy-in for that, but at least it would be less obfuscated.
1) Is this a full time position?  If not, then describe the expected 
workload.   From the description, its a level of effort contract 
somewhat less than full time. State that level.
2) The style manual (last bullet) is a strategic item, not a tactical 
item.  Delete it.
3)  Matrix management - seriously? That's how we got to this situation 
in the first place.
4) Term - for a tactical contract, this is pretty long - 1.5 years with 
the possibility of a year extension.

Small items:
1) Drop the "Experience as an RFC editor" bullet in favor of 
"Familiarity with the RFC series is desired but not required".
2) The "culture and process" bullet is also strategic and not 
tactical.   Drop this to just the RFC process.
3) Travel internationally - state if this is in addition to the IETF 
meetings.

Overall comment:

This has the feel to me of a push towards a more "managed" RFC Editor vs 
the independent model we've had over the lifetime of the series - and 
doing it by small nibbles and by delay.  The RFC++ bof indicated 
community displeasure with that direction, and I'm not sure this SOW is 
representative of community desires.    I'd be happier with this if the 
sole and only contract reporting link is from this contractor to the 
LLC.  The LLC MAY appoint the RSOC for day to day things, but any 
contractual discussions OF ANY KIND should be with the actual 
organization that holds the contract.   From a community point of view, 
we have oversight and a direct line of responsibility from the LLC to 
the community (with the concomitant ability of the community to recall 
or otherwise fail to reappoint LLC board members) .  That is not the 
case with the RSOC.

With respect to the evolution of the RFC Series - I haven't seen any 
clear statement from anyone of the changes they believe need to be 
made.  So, prior to putting us in the penalty box for a year and a half, 
perhaps we could actually get a statement of interests which would 
indicate that we need such a delay in the RFC SE selection process.    
E.g. a full formal ID/RFC not random musings in email with enough 
initial support that we have the possibility of getting to some sort of 
consensus for change if we invest the time.

Later, Mike



On 8/30/2019 12:38 PM, Sarah Banks wrote:
> (Cross-post with [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>)
>
> Hello,
> The RSOC has received a lot of feedback regarding the current SOW, in 
> addition to the feedback received generally around the RSE role, both 
> on and off list, and at the microphone at the plenary session in 
> Montreal. We've listened, discussed, and come up with a proposal that 
> you'll find attached here.
> Broadly speaking, the RSE role contains 2  functions, a strategic 
> function and a tactical function. We believe that we, as a community, 
> still want RFCs published while we discuss the RSE role evolution. We 
> also have a contract in place with the RPC (both Production Center and 
> Publisher), both of whom are accustomed to a day to day contact to 
> lean on for assistance (the current RSE).
> With that in mind, we are proposing a temporary position that focuses 
> on the tactical components of the current RSE role, with 2 large work 
> items in mind.
>
> First, this temporary position (called the Temporary RFC Series 
> Project Manager) would serve as the day to day contact for the RPC, 
> assisting with tactical items.
>
> Second, this role would focus on the v3 format work, assisting with 
> the delivery of the new tools for the format work, and bringing the 
> new format work to a close.
>
> Details are included within the SOW, attached with this email.
>
> The IAB plans on sharing a follow up email shortly, that covers 
> possible next steps for the strategic portions of the RSE role and the 
> evolution discussion.
>
> We'd like to open a 2 week comment period on the SOW, starting on 
> August 30, 2019, closing ons on September 14, 2019. Please send your 
> comments and feedback to the RSOC ([e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>).
>
> Kind regards,
> Sarah Banks
> For the RSOC
>
>