Re: RFC Editor Function SOW Review

[Todd Glassey <tglassey at earthlink.net>]

Hmmmm... The SOW MUST define all the elements of the Editor's responsibility and all the specific tasks they perform as well as the SLA's for those Tasks. It also MUST address the SOD (Separation of Duties) within the Editor's work since they are altering the IP submitted.

Without that ther is no comprehensive model for evaluating how well the IETF met its standards and whether it caused damage to others in the process.

Todd Glassey as an Auditor.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>
>Sent: Jul 18, 2006 5:18 AM
>To: Pete Resnick <presnick at qualcomm.com>
>Cc: IETF Administrative Director <iad at ietf.org>, IETF Announcement list <ietf at ietf.org>
>Subject: Re: RFC Editor Function SOW Review
>
>Pete,
>
>Pete Resnick wrote:
>> On 7/10/06 at 8:34 AM -0400, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
>> 
>>> we seek comments on the Statement of Work located at:
>>> http://koi.uoregon.edu/~iaoc/
>> 
>> 
>> - The SOW has nothing about performance expectations (i.e., what is 
>> noted in section 4 of draft-mankin-pub-req-10). Though I don't think the 
>> SOW should have hard requirements in this regard 
>> (draft-mankin-pub-req-10 doesn't), I do think we need to give some 
>> estimate of how many documents they're going to see and their expected 
>> throughput. A bid is going to have to be based on how fast they think 
>> they need to do the editing.
>
>Indeed, and that has to be part of the SLA component of final contract.
>But the numbers in the final SLA may also be part of a price negotiation.
>I agree we need to put SLA numbers in the RFP, for comparison purposes.
>
>> 
>> - The SOW mentions the Editorial Board for Independent submissions, but 
>> doesn't say where it comes from. I take it from the slides at the 
>> Thursday plenary that this is still in flux, but at least there should 
>> be a note indicating that this is going to be filled in later.
>
>Correct.
>
>    Brian
>> 
>> I've already written privately about some nits. Here are couple more:
>> 
>> - Strike A-1-g-3. It's redundant with A-1-g-1.
>> - Change "category" to "stream" in A-4-b. "Category" doesn't make any 
>> sense there (or if it does, it's undefined.)
>> 
>> pr
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ietf mailing list
>Ietf at ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf