Re: RSE Bid Process

[Patrick McManus <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ted, et al.

I suggest that we take this event as an opportunity to revisit what the
IETF really needs in RSE-2020 before committing to a SOW. While the rfc++
bof was ill prepared, it certainly highlighted some serious disagreements
in the community. In the spirit of finding a new match, we would be well
served by investigating the various related stresses before trying to find
a new RSE.

That may mean reopening 6635 and reconsidering the RSE's relationship to
the IESG and the IAB and further exploring the issues around independence
cited in Heather's email. Perhaps that will result in large changes, or
perhaps it will be a reaffirmation of the current model. Either outcome
seems like progress.

It is a credit to the work of the RSE, RSOC, RPC, IAB, IAOC and many other
acronyms that we're in a stable enough place to work on this - the rfc
editor function is a multi legged stool. Should the RSE be vacant, the RFCs
will continue to flow for a while.

-Patrick


On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 3:06 PM Ted Hardie <[e-mail]> wrote:

> As folks are aware, there is ongoing discussion on Heather’s decision not
> to continue as RFC Series Editor (RSE) and about how the situation has been
> handled. Firstly, we’d like to express our regret at how things have
> transpired and our willingness to have an open discussion with the
> community about where we can all best go from here. This mail sets out our
> view of how recent events unfolded, and our understanding of the process
> for finding the next RSE.
>
>
> The RSE currently has a two year contract which began in 2018 and which
> permitted two extensions of up to two years each.  As part of their duties
> under RFC 6635, the RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) reviewed the
> contract in May of this year.  On June 6th, they notified Heather Flanagan,
> the current RSE, that they would recommend the contract be extended for two
> years.  At the same time, they noted an intent to prepare a Request for
> Proposals during that two year period, in order to address some concerns
> that were raised about response rates after the last bid process.
> Immediately afterwards, the RSOC notified the IAB both of their
> recommendation to renew the contract in 2020 and their intent to prepare an
> RFP for 2022.
>
> Initial discussions within the IAB would normally have been held at the
> following IAB meeting, on June 10th.   On June 7th, however, the RSE
> notified the IAB, the IETF LLC Board, and RSOC that she did not intend to
> renew the contract.  The IAB is grateful that she provided early notice and
> that she has agreed during the remaining months of the existing contract to
> help the RSOC and IETF community to consider the requirements needed for
> the next RFC Series Editor.
>
> Discussions on the requirements are ongoing on the IETF list.  While we
> expect additional community discussions of future processes or models, we
> also want to take advantage of the time Heather’s courtesy provided as best
> we can.  As a result, we believe we should begin the RFP process as set out
> in RFC 6635 now, with an aim to getting an RSE and a contract in place with
> sufficient transition time.  Since the last running of this process, the
> IAOC has concluded and the IETF LLC taken shape, so we wanted to lay out to
> the community our understanding of that process with the IETF LLC in
> place.  As with other aspects of the IAOC to LLC transition, the RSOC and
> IAB will aim for minimal change to the current process, and zero unexpected
> changes. That would give the following steps:
>
> 1) The RSOC prepares a statement of work based on RFC 6635 and previous
> RFPs <https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/RSE-RFP-4August2017.pdf>.
>
> 2) The RSOC sends the SOW out for public comment.
>
> If IAB members, the IAB, or the IETF LLC board have comments, they occur
> during this period.  There is no separate review for them.
>
> 3) After the RSOC finalizes the SOW, it notifies the IAB, which requests
> the IETF LLC issue an RFP.
>
> Note: this is not an approval step, just the mechanics of who has the
> token to turn this crank.
>
> 4) The RFP is issued by the IETF LLC.
>
> 5) The RSOC, or a committee formed from within the RSOC, reviews the
> proposals and interviews candidates.  Depending on the number of candidates
> this could involve steps for creating a short list before running
> interviews.
>
> 6) The RSOC recommends an appointment to the IAB.
>
> 7) The IAB approves the appointment, subject to contracting.
>
> 8) The IETF LLC negotiates a contract with the appointed RSE.
>
> 9) After timing is agreed, the new RSE is announced and a transition
> begins.
>
> Once again, we regret how things have transpired and will be engaging with
> the community on the longer term handling of how the IAB, RSE and IETF
> relate to one another. That may include a new version of RFC 6635.  Until
> those conclude, however, we believe we need to move forward with the
> current process. As part of that, we want to confirm with the community our
> understanding of the process required under the existing model and
> procedures.
>
> If you have comments on this point, please send them by replying to this
> mail or to [e-mail] and [e-mail].  Note that both lists include
> the current RSE as a member.  If you have comments on the SOW, e.g., on
> appropriate length or renewal intervals, please send them to RSOC after the
> SOW has been published for community review. For comments on the broader
> situation, the [e-mail] list is, as always, available.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ted Hardie
>
> for the IAB
>
>
>