[rsab] Revised document approval process

["Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

This is the proposed step-wise process inducing the comments from Lars:

1. The secretariat assigns a shepherd (by setting a random order and then use round robin) and set the RSAB datatracker state to “Approval Requested”.

2. The shepherd makes an initial review. This is mainly to double-check formalities, e.g. idnits, confirm authorship, double-check normative references or updates of other RFCs. If any problems are detected the shepherd will work with the authors and RSWG chairs to address them. If the document is ready, the shepherd will tell the secretariat to start the community call by changing the RSAB state in the datatracker to “Community Call Requested”. The shepherd is also responsible to check if any “extra care” is needed (see Alexis mail and RFC9280 3.2.3) and additional mailing lists should be added in the community call. If the shepherd believes this is needed, he/she should reconfirm by email with RSAB and ensure the secretariat is aware (by using the comment field in datatracker when changing the state).

3. The secretariat sets the datatracker state to “In Community Call” and sends out the following email for the community call (by default if no extra care is needed) to the following lists:
- rfc‑interest@rfc‑ <mailto:[e-mail]>editor.org <http://editor.org/> (for broader RFC community)
- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> (for IETF community)
- [e-mail] <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/irtf-announce> (for IRTF) 
- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> and the IAB will add this document to the next business call agenda for awareness not discussion
- rswg@ <mailto:[e-mail]>rfc-editor.org <mailto:[e-mail]> 

———
The RSAB has received a request from the RFC Series WG (RSWG) to
approve the following document as informational RFC on the editorial stream:
<name>

The RSAB solicits final comments from a wide range of communities.
Please send substantive comments to the [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> mailing lists
by XXXX-XX-XX. Please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow
automated sorting.

Abstract
  <abstract>

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
  <url>
———

The reply-to will be set to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>

4. By default the community call ends after 2 weeks. Then the secretariat updates the datatracker state to “Waiting for Shepherd Go-Ahead” and notifies the shepherd. The shepherd will review all comments and again work with the RSWG and authors to address them. The RSWG list should be cc’ed (except for minor edits that could also be addressed during the publication process at the end). When the document is ready, the shepherd starts the ballot process by setting the RSAB state to “RSAB evaluation” and notifies the RSAB (the datatracker should send a note to the RSAB and RSWG lists on state change).

5. As soon as the document is in RSAB evaluation, all RSAB members have 2 weeks to enter their ballot position (see RFC9280 for details) in the datatracker. Any comments or CONCERN are sent to the RWSG list. 

6. After two weeks if the document is approved (no CONCERN and everybody entered a position), the shepherd can do a final review and inform the secretariat that the document is ready by setting the datatracker state to “Approved - announcement to be sent”.
 
7a. If approved, the secretariat sends a following email to rswg@ <mailto:[e-mail]>rfc-editor.org <mailto:[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> and [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>:

———
The RSAB has approved the following document as 
informational RFC on the editorial stream:
<name>

Abstract
  <abstract>

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
  <url>
———

The secretariat also informs the RPC and updates the document state accordingly to “Sent to RFC Editor”. 
The RPC then starts the processing (publication as well as as the implementation of any actions specified in the doc).

7b. If the document has a CONCERN, the secretariat will schedule an RSAB call in roughly two weeks time based on availability. In parallel, the shepherd will work with the concern holder(s), the RSWG chair, and the authors to address the CONCERN. Emails should be cc’ed to RSWG.
If the concern is addressed before the call, the shepherd can set the datatracker state to “Approved- announcement to be sent” at any time and cancel the call. If the call happens, the document can either be approved with the CONCERN due to 3 YESes (see RFC9280) or is sent back to the RSWG and the process starts again.