ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Comments on draft-iab-rfc-editor: IETF control

2006-05-26 15:33:21

On 5/25/06 at 4:30 PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:

Ultimately, the rfc-editor function needs to be accountable to the IETF community because we're the ones paying for it.


when you assert that

"Ultimately, the rfc-editor function needs to be accountable to the IETF community"

it makes sense to me - this is, after all, a record of the 'outcomes' of the IETF process. I suspect, however, that the accountability set is a little broader than just the IETF folk and assumes different characteristics for different players, but accountability to the IETF has always been part and parcel of the RFC Editor role.

"because we're the ones paying for it"

Historically this has not been the case if "we" = IETF meeting attendees + IETF mailing list members.

Delving down a bit here, I suspect that, as always, the longstanding issue here is the actual level of 'independence" of the RFC Editor, and the potential for a player to perform an end run around the IETF Internet Standards Process and have an RFC published that was in some form of fashion previously rejected or contradicted by some part of the IETF. In practice I'm hard pressed to bring forward any concrete example of this potential, and I know that the folk at ISI who have performed this role take their independence very seriously and exercise their responsibility very carefully.

However attempting to codify this role is problematical - I don't see it as being helpful if we state categorically that IETF Consensus "should trump anything else", but nor do I see it as being helpful if we say "well the role is independent of the IETF- so we'll provide no input"

It seems to me that if you want a simple copy editor and publication function then you may have to trim down the role of the RFC Editor to simple direct functions performed under the direction of the Secretariat of the IETF - but bear in mind that this is NOT the entirety of the RFC Editor role that has been performed up until now. If you want a RFC Editor that has a role that continues to function much as the RFC Editor has been doing in the past then you need to vest a significant amount of discretion into the RFC Editor role and expect that at times it will lead to spirited debate from time to time in the future.

regards,

  Geoff





_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf