I'd like to make sure that all of you are aware that draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2 was posted. Discussion of it will take place on the [email protected] mail list. If you have an interest in the RFC Editor model, please review the document and participate in the discussion on that list.
Enjoy, Russ > From: Glenn Kowack <[email protected]> > Date: October 26, 2010 12:31:26 PM PDT > To: RFC Interest <[email protected]> > Subject: [rfc-i] Transitional RFC Editor recommendations published in > draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2 > > The Transitional RFC Series Editor (TRSE) role was created to maintain series > continuity during 2010, and for the TRSE to learn the job through direct > experience. Based on that experience (I have been doing that role since > last March) I was to make recommendations on the role of the RFC Series > Editor (RSE), a job description, and a search and selection process. The > first draft of those TRSE recommendations are now available as an internet > draft at > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2. This is a > revision to RFC 5620, which defined RFC Editor Model Version 1. I will give > a presentation on this, with Q&A, at the Monday plenary in Beijing. > > The challenge in defining the RSE role - filled by a paid professional - is > ensuring it is structured to advance the Series consistent with the > requirements of the community, where nearly all positions are done by > volunteers. Equally important is defining a job that will be attractive to > qualified candidates. > > Like any specification, this document is detailed. Furthermore, because it's > important that readers see "the entire package" in one place, this draft > includes sections that could have been placed in separate documents. This > makes it longer than 5620. To aid in understanding the draft, I have > included below the executive summary of the recommendations. I urge you to > read the summary before reviewing the draft. This is also suitable for those > of you who will not be able to read the entire document. > > The IAB, at their request, has not yet seen the document. Furthermore, > although the RSAG (RFC Series Advisory Group) has seen and commented on the > draft, because of time constraints I have not been able to include a large > number of their very useful comments and corrections. I had hoped to > integrate RSAG comments before publicizing the draft, but the time required > would have impacted presentations and discussions in Beijing. So, > integrating those suggestions will have to wait for the next draft. This has > one clear advantage: the community gets to participate in this process. Net, > this proposal has not been filtered in any way before the community gets to > see it. > > Finally, please join me in discussions on this list. If there is interest, I > will host one or more WebEx introductory and Q&A sessions later this week or > early next. You may also contact me on skype ('gkowack') or by phone (+1 650 > 279 0990). Please send email to [email protected] in advance to schedule a > call. > > This document was prepared with the assistance of many members of the > community, including of course the RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG). Many > put in a great deal of time and effort. Thank you. > > I look forward to your comments on the list, and discussions in Beijing. > > best regards, > Glenn > Transitional RFC Series Editor > > ___ > > Executive Summary: Refinements to the RFC Editor Model > > The RFC Series is the Internet technical community's official medium, > through which it communicates with itself and the rest of the world. > The RFC Editor is the community-defined and -supported function that > accepts documents from different streams, makes textual edits for > clarity and formal correctness as prescribed in the RFC Series Style > Manual, and publishes and archives those documents as RFCs for free > access by everyone. > > RFC 5620 first defined the components and processes of the present- > day RFC Editor (Model Version 1), including the RFC Series Editor > (RSE) as its leading component. However, the attempt to hire a new > RSE proved difficult and resulted in retention of a Transitional RSE, > or TRSE. The TRSE was asked to perform the RSE functions described > in RFC 5620, to determine if those descriptions matched what was > needed and, if necessary, recommend changes to the role of the RSE > and refinements to the RFC Editor model based on his experience. The > central observation of the TRSE is that: > > the RSE role demands the expertise and experience of a senior > manager and subject matter expert in technical writing, technical > publishing, and technical series development. > > This observation drives the clarifications and changes recommended > here to RFC Editor Model Version 1. Although modest, these changes > are fundamental to the future success of the RFC Editor's service to > the Internet community. The first clarification is: > > the overall leadership and management of RFC Editor functions > must be by the RFC Series Editor - the editorial and publications > subject matter and management expert. > > However, this general leadership must be tempered by two > considerations. > > o The Internet technical community has requirements, processes, and > traditions that must be followed by the RSE and across the entire > RFC Editor function > > o The line between the responsibilities of the RSE and of the IETF > Administration and Oversight Committee (IAOC) must be clarified. > > The new model combines RFC Editor leadership as it would be practiced > in a typical not-for-profit organization with the following Internet > community-driven practices: > > o seek community input appropriately and widely, > > o encourage volunteer initiative and contribution, and > > o practice supervision according to specified procedures. > > This model recommends collaboration between the RSE and the IAOC > analogous to the partnership between line management and finance as > practiced in most modern corporations:. > > o The RSE is responsible for regular editorial activities > management, including long-term editorial planning. > > o The IAOC retains its leadership of legal and financial matters. > > The RSE reports to the IAB for general matters. The IAB retains its > responsibility for ensuring proper RSE policy formation and > adherence. > > Additional recommendations for changes to model provided in RFC 5620 > include: > > o The independence of the Independent Submission Stream and > Independent Submission Editor (ISE) is reiterated. > > o The role of the RSE Advisory Group (RSAG) is marginally expanded > to ensure the RSE follows community will and to provide counsel to > the IAB when the RSE is either unavailable or the subject of a > discussion. > > This memo also clarifies the RSE's responsibility for maintaining > Series quality. The updated model divides Series continuity, a key > element of the RSE role, into editorial and operational continuity. > To accomplish the former, the RSE is to maintain and develop the RFC > Series Style Manual. To ensure the latter, the RSE is to develop and > maintain the RFC Series Procedures Manual. To return the RFC Editor > to its historical level of independence, this memo recommends > creation of an RFC Editor stream. > > Finally, an updated RSE search and selection process is proposed. > This process is rooted in community participation, qualified > participants and expert advisors, and follows carefully described > procedures and elements to ensure a successful hire. > > An unexpected consequence of the TRSE effort is that most of the > changes proposed for the updated model return the RFC Editor to the > style and perspective used during the first 40 years of its life, > although adapted to today's structure and operation of the technical > community. This memo concludes that this time-proven arrangement is > the best way, to serve the requirements of the Internet technical > community. > > __end summary > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
