Re: [Rfced-future] [IAB] Welcome to the RFC Editor Future Development Program

Joel,

>  My preference is 
> that we define the job such that it is clearly the RFC Editor's job to 
> lead that discussion / process.

I very strongly agree with that, but to my mind that requires that we agree
on the principle that the RFC Editor is autonomous and the series is not
controlled by the IETF or, except at a very abstract level, by the IAB.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 01-Apr-20 01:57, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> My take is that we can not focus as much as I would like.
> 
> We need to deal with the questions of the authority, responsibility, and 
> role of the person we call the RFC Editor.  Differences in understanding 
> of those aspects seem to have made a significant contribution to getting 
> us into this mess.
> 
> To the degree possible, I would prefer that we not get into "what we 
> want the RFC Series to be".  We probably do at least need to discuss the 
> relationship of the RFC Editor to that discussion.  My preference is 
> that we define the job such that it is clearly the RFC Editor's job to 
> lead that discussion / process.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 3/31/2020 2:43 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Hi again,
>>
>> With apologies to Mark, he pointed out to me that I misinterpreted his 
>> message.  Taking another swing.
>>
>>> On 30 Mar 2020, at 23:03, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net 
>>> <mailto:mnot@mnot.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 31 Mar 2020, at 7:37 am, Brian E Carpenter 
>>>> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> what are the basic principles
>>>> of the RFC series and its Editor's role? I'm not sure that has really 
>>>> ever been
>>>> properly written down as a separate "mission statement" or whatever.
>>>
>>>
>>> One thing that occurred to me recently is that, while this program is 
>>> defined with the following scope:
>>>
>>>> Discussion of changes to how the RFC Editor function is managed, 
>>>> staffed, and overseen are all within scope.
>>>
>>> It isn't said whether discussion of the RFC Series itself (and 
>>> potential changes to it) are in scope. Defining the principles of the 
>>> series seems like it's more the latter than the former.
>>>
>>> Could we (Eliot?) come to some determination about whether the latter 
>>> is in scope or not for this program? I suspect having that well 
>>> understood -- either way it goes -- will help considerably.
>>
>> To state the question in a slightly different way:
>>
>>   * Should the program worry about the structure of the series or should
>>     the program worry about putting in place someone who could lead the
>>     community in worrying about the structure of the series (among other
>>     things)? 
>>
>>
>> A related question:
>>
>>   * Should we establish a process that addresses series evolution over
>>     time or should we leave that for later?
>>
>>
>> I think these sorts of questions are good to sort out in advance so that 
>> we know best how to direct our energies.
>>
>> Eliot
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Rfced-future mailing list
>>> Rfced-future@iab.org <mailto:Rfced-future@iab.org>
>>> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future
>>
>>
> 