Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB? [was: Re: Comment on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-12]

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

John,

But you're proposing an addition to the IAB charter that is not
concerned with the RFC Editor model. Regardless of whether this
is a good idea, surely it is out of rfced-future's scope to
decide that? So I think Eliot is correct *as far as his remit
goes*.

Lars, instructions please.

Regards
    Brian

On 14-Mar-22 07:53, John C Klensin wrote:
> Eliot,
> 
> I have posted an objection, not to removing the liaison, but to
> prevent reinstating some variation on it without going through a
> long and time-consuming process of document revision.
> 
> More explanation in a note I hope to finish and get posted
> within the next several hours, but the amount of uncertainty
> about details and implications of the new model -- uncertainty
> that seems to have been illustrated by questions or comments
> within the last week or so -- strongly suggests that, where
> there are not strong arguments to the contrary, we should build
> flexibility for efficient small corrections to the documents or
> their interpretation rather than locking options out.
> 
>     john
> 
> 
> --On Sunday, March 13, 2022 14:46 +0100 Eliot Lear
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> At the moment, I am not hearing any objections.
>>
>> Eliot
>>
>> On 11.03.22 10:34, Lars Eggert wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2022-3-11, at 11:29, Brian Carpenter
>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> I have no problem if there's consensus to remove the liaison,
>>> I think it would be good if others in the program spoke up on
>>> this, so the chairs can take consensus.
> 
>