Re: RFC Series Editor Resignation

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 19 June 2019 04:46 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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 F09E112031D; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 H3PuqEVcvtBH; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9952512003F; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id p184so8960257pfp.7; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=96ApC2mSZb6mIBytOMLQEUr8vvHlKX5NehvH3WDKGgI=; b=XzGe1hprk5KoOyO5nYK7ZQLbXlk10Q+UsrjHlROKzJTLe5Ande7h9qiS11efP6ct++ naocrPS9iNn9GI6dtDhhIcvCGvpmTIXWaYSYVTLxFLoZxZsm52CcO6pnmeEISJie+iy4 pKkFwPUtPt+P7byKH3rGs9ybUwA7mfxddA2MkqKxJsQwuaObFAMyWdxsciOHbmkrVfWf ADsM1GvHIIx9nlrmXBWz9t/BrrD1vwmcWosCtll9dYFzMLn9uRXczlSA2mFupUrfVlyv +2K1ndGEgqj6s1/tvKLsIfjt2sAP/2erYlQ3bc7/A5Oay4+8C10T0NvEusBMqAO3wugW vlJg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=96ApC2mSZb6mIBytOMLQEUr8vvHlKX5NehvH3WDKGgI=; b=qvjOELytIEICW+irVG6CAgxLuXZTwN4iNQ2Us3KJrOmw14juAJiPPR2+9o+azDRTAQ hAE0mDXH84CaRCL257qJpj8FocHhJegjK9oN+oiTNY7aeuA82kBkmcOWwE+AKcv/Aqe7 20wR6PyIXYTk9gxSEgDAmCjlzbefG6caocTfQ5VFVxp5okbE8TApdXt4Ol5mCfz9JkJV tUVtrv80PtfVQ1TlpDjxF357BE//BVHWuYv8YMdDrFf4CiJN2OZmM5VwpA7qcpaMVm85 YqVAi+kpOtxko+4qITZ6b2XMKtqGI9A21zx+zZhTu4eEr+NdFbKMGgrtlnKJLKtKN2B8 YZrQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW1VxGnKmmXpSgBcfB0wHJPc1bglM9/ENfgu4WCov03kcqxljtJ faV5+oCrqTWWBHE+5CtjIs4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzviXMVhnEcnku/U35aswMtFKA73cMhqC2pBdjkj4NXcO8A8LE9webuBF9rBZtk8o8xdTjy+g==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:a46:: with SMTP id z6mr5968671pgk.76.1560919572077; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (32.23.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [123.255.23.32]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i3sm17877445pfo.138.2019.06.18.21.46.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: RFC Series Editor Resignation
To: Alexander Neilson <alexander@neilson.net.nz>, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
Cc: IAB Executive Administrative Manager <execd@iab.org>, LLC-Board@ietf.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>
References: <685B34F6-E0E2-4050-B9DD-615F475F62B7@encrypted.net> <58D30A55-FB45-476B-997F-1D9D58E89AE0@gmail.com> <A24BDAB9-B118-4A8A-A6DF-D2094ABF3E33@neilson.net.nz>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e4251435-b786-4bb4-0065-c76bc96f1eeb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 16:46:06 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <A24BDAB9-B118-4A8A-A6DF-D2094ABF3E33@neilson.net.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/DdyEzvOTXR8sb2u8qYqNmOeJcfY>
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, 19 Jun 2019 04:46:15 -0000

Well, I'm confused too. It's not as if the house was burning down, except that now it is.

What Sarah's message didn't make quite clear is that the 2021 re-bid would be two years early, given that the full term of the current contract ends 6 years from 1/1/2018. (https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/RSE-2018-Independent-Contractor-24Oct17-Public.pdf,
Clause 3 "TERM"). In other words the RSOC and/or IAB had already decided to truncate the contract. This makes us (legally personified as IETF LLC) look like an unreliable business partner.

So what precipitated this disruption? From my point of view, everything was running well, even if occasionally some nominal target numbers were missed; it's great to have a series editor who actually has appropriate professional knowledge and experience, unlike all her predecessors. So the decision to prematurely run a bidding process seems to have been a really bad idea. Something about ain't broke, don't fix. The attempted fix has apparently caused serious breakage. This deserves a transparent explanation to the community.

The phrase "expressly for the purposes of refining our RFP process" literally makes no sense to me as an explanation for breaking off a satisfactory contract. If there's something wrong with our RFP process, we seem to have thrown away almost all the time available to improve it, given that the normal date for the rebid would be sometime in 2023. That seems like the exact opposite of what the community needed from the RSOC and the IAB.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 19-Jun-19 15:55, Alexander Neilson wrote:
> I may be wrong but I read it as meaning a renewal of the current contract to allow time to refine the process and that new process would be the structure the RFP for a new contractor went out under. 
> 
> Regards
> Alexander
> 
> Alexander Neilson
> Neilson Productions Limited
> 021 329 681
> alexander@neilson.net.nz <mailto:alexander@neilson.net.nz>
> 
> On 19/06/2019, at 14:52, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com <mailto:aaron.falk@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>> I’m not sure whether my question below should be addressed to the RSOC, IAB, IETF Exec Dir, or IETF LLC, so maybe one of them will enlighten me.
>>
>> Regarding
>>
>>     Although the RSOC had recommended renewing the RFC Series Editor (RSE) contract for another two years, and then put the contract back out to bid in 2021 expressly for the purposes of refining our RFP process
>>
>> I’m wondering what exactly it means to put a contract out to bid “to refine the RFP process”. For example, is someone bidding on the RSE contract supposed to assume they are just providing information and not actually going to be a candidate for the award? (Is that even legal?) Or, should we presume that this is an actual competition for the RSE work? I can’t understand how you can solicit bids for the RSE but say is is just to refine the process. Can someone explain this curious wording?
>>
>> If the goal is to replace the current RSE, perhaps someone can explain why.
>>
>> --aaron
>>