Re: RFC Series Editor (RSE) Statement of Work

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 31 July 2019 17:28 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550CE120600 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 10:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=AZlwG//I; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=HQBMFTSb
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7uXzs2fUrJvQ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 10:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D06C81205FA for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 10:28:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD14622054; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:28:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:28:31 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm3; bh=g o1zfnv5U4dLqIJ5W7Ojin4JJClDwV4n8ySoaQbM7ps=; b=AZlwG//IPyixAR9Cs r5OYmZLnJ8UZIybOdxc7O/nf4ujpufwe8a6HNaaEeWjcjTdJpnAdyb4CjMBYhJni iDuu6Nxae1pf8iMn2We88UhSSgGX0bvZyeTMj5j6o+YKuWI46IwaT48y1saUtVfv phWNcGaZ2l9JSnXGnM3vmVfVp9PQ+Obpd3WKOC81NWTxOxH5B0J4NjecmD70fIlt 1Accsgv3xyEz7HrPVj4sM4W0CpriYQYN1VFs3NLcKtVWFMIcA8Uv5yPPJbh0e0vl nPYydtAc3s1PWklP3usEHR958m4wFrInJ/AD/Q9u2AbosWKujG+9gL4Lpu/nraNl 4UMhA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=go1zfnv5U4dLqIJ5W7Ojin4JJClDwV4n8ySoaQbM7 ps=; b=HQBMFTSbes3E+SEDrFiH/a48olDUdk2tZ2Qkvm2OCiiAVud8M0X6aBHkN MgkktdPh/12k6GLO8wSYyqlS4FM+cy5R9INYfhh/GXFjUWj3B2G5MGuGYGKc43o1 hRowqDSo6N+oFXkqr0P/3HILCu1SrEON3jSm48+qUFEkYXyebB5PD7jiyDGVTlxR YfpoWDm+CV0kjoDKwdyAMulWPWz2JxEIKQ+aWhmo9ixYG4exI0zw2M5bhA19mkgT OH6TqDvjarj3tk2zbBN8ST1i52xaHF5wSI+e+1Eumq/adN5uDTYL+Uzh+6Rwbhd5 v8EYWQ9cwp5X5V3UiU/RYzkt7/Qeg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:v89BXRTZMPQoserUzpGk-prv0RxMeOF_08jbd7cYZwkbOClwPaQxdQ>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrleehgdduuddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomheptehlihhs shgrucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucfkphepud ejfedrfeekrdduudejrdejkeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghlihhsshgr segtohhophgvrhifrdhinhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:v89BXVVzLsCk8KOtd2VTwSwMWUmkwiY9my5nWj7iZtRnXNqveJTAVQ> <xmx:v89BXTaH4XCMJV-nwzlfKGLLBs67JVJSncXRZsFPaGYF70DgbWnjnA> <xmx:v89BXb1LitbaITzNSLkuyrsbnNdE5scv0Y2jeWabNAMuF1uFZqsyeA> <xmx:v89BXRRchJdCS_6VKWuItoT_dXBbIyZnyEoHMs90aNSMk8Pt_toFzA>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.78]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1BB9A8005A; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:28:31 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Subject: Re: RFC Series Editor (RSE) Statement of Work
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <8ce5bf75-7040-4b6c-32fc-0042cc6dbfc2@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:28:29 -0400
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <848781BF-6AF6-4DB2-A845-6A6449B36FBF@cooperw.in>
References: <9817BB4B-D828-4128-A70C-A8B966E6642F@encrypted.net> <CAL02cgRcGF80R_h5it_u7eGQrMjavpZ6_noEKb5vY5i1HqJYaA@mail.gmail.com> <7e82f47a-6a1d-8d3e-b183-e5159a071481@gmail.com> <9f7e969e-0374-2f9f-4ec6-e2d85a2fb819@gmail.com> <B027130E-8357-44C7-AAAF-FA11C249FD92@isi.edu> <F6C97564-6DD6-47A2-A9E6-5401F50BE4D5@cable.comcast.com> <ce36b799-80e3-7eaa-576b-c7137793f115@cs.tcd.ie> <21882.1564430860@localhost> <8ce5bf75-7040-4b6c-32fc-0042cc6dbfc2@comcast.net>
To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/CRzIEA69z39Hu4w4U7BliCPsLTw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:28:34 -0000

Hi Mike,

> On Jul 29, 2019, at 4:48 PM, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> On 7/29/2019 4:07 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>> Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>>     >> [JL] If this is the case, I wonder if it much matters to the community
>>     >> whether the role is an employee (full or part time) or a contractor
>>     >> (full or part time)?
>>          > For reasons stated earlier on the iasa2 list and as I stated at
>>     > the plenary during open mic, I remain opposed to the idea of an
>>     > employee-RSE. It does seem to keep being suggested, but that won't
>>     > IMO make it a better idea;-)
>> 
>> Are you opposed to the "clerical" issue of how the person is paid,
>> or are you opposed to the person being hired by interview rather than RFP?
>> 
> Practical:
> 
> 1) The general LOE for the RSE according to RFC6635 is 20 hours a week.  It's difficult to be just a part-time employee as a salaried worker for various reasons including benefits, and the general assumption that if you're working for company A, you're not working for company B.  Throw in the need to do full time weeks 3-5 times a year for the RSE (IETF and various retreats or other meetings) and that time has to be taken from other employers and you get into some messy situations.
> 
> 2) The employing organization (e.g. the LLC) doesn't really have the size to be able to handle traditional employees.  Even the ED hire is going to be interesting.  Think about payroll, HR, benefits, etc.  Then think about the need for some manager. 

The LLC has planned and is preparing for the situation where the executive director and potentially others could be sustained as traditional employees.

> You could make it the LLC under an "employee with a contract model" and assign them to the LLC to manage, but there would still be a lot of things to work out.  Then there's "advancement" or the lack thereof.   For Ray, we punted - he was really a contracted for employee by the IAOC of a larger company (ISOC) as far as I can tell.  

Ray was an ISOC employee. 

Best,
Alissa


> And placing the RSE under the ED is pretty much a recipe for failure for oh so many reasons.
> 
> 3) Stephen's other note (surprising to me) about life tenure after a period of time in certain companies.  I don't think we want to limit our selection to countries where this isn't the law.
> 
> Relational:
> 
> 1) This is a senior person who really should be co-equal with the IAB and IESG.  Contracts at least allow for some specification of relationships between these three entities without screwing up supremacy issues in each of the entities bailiwick.   I would expect the next contract to be rather restrictive on who gets to give direction to the RSE.
> 
> 2) We haven't any one who could actually be a manager respected (in terms of the ability to actually provide value add in managing someone who knows more about publishing than the putative manager) by a good candidate for the RSE position.
> 
> Obvious:
> 
> 1) Publishing is not in any way a core competency of the IETF.
> 
> 
>