idnits 2.17.1 draft-hinden-iasa2-rfc6635bis-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (August 6, 2018) is 2083 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4844 (Obsoleted by RFC 8729) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4071 (Obsoleted by RFC 8711) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6635 (Obsoleted by RFC 8728) == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-ietf-iasa2-struct-03 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 5620 (Obsoleted by RFC 6548, RFC 6635) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3777 (Obsoleted by RFC 7437) Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group O. Kolkman, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft 4 Obsoletes: 6635 (if approved) J. Halpern, Ed. 5 Intended status: Informational Ericsson 6 Expires: February 7, 2019 IAB 8 R. Hinden, Ed. 9 Check Point Software 10 August 6, 2018 12 RFC Editor Model (Version 2) 13 draft-hinden-iasa2-rfc6635bis-01 15 Abstract 17 The RFC Editor model described in this document divides the 18 responsibilities for the RFC Series into three functions: the RFC 19 Series Editor, the RFC Production Center, and the RFC Publisher. 20 Internet Architecture Board (IAB) oversight via the RFC Series 21 Oversight Committee (RSOC) is described, as is the relationship 22 between the IETF Administration Limited Liability Corporation Board 23 and the RSOC. This document reflects the experience gained with "RFC 24 Editor Model (Version 1)", documented in RFC 5620; and obsoletes RFC 25 6635 to replace all references to the IASA and related structures 26 with those defined by the IASA 2.0 Model. 28 Status of This Memo 30 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 31 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 33 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 34 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 35 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 36 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 38 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 39 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 40 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 41 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 43 This Internet-Draft will expire on February 7, 2019. 45 Copyright Notice 47 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 48 document authors. All rights reserved. 50 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 51 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 52 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 53 publication of this document. Please review these documents 54 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 55 to this document. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 1.1. The RFC Editor Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 2. RFC Editor Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 2.1. RFC Series Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 63 2.1.1. Strategic Leadership and Management of the 64 Publication and Production Functions . . . . . . . . 8 65 2.1.2. Representation of the RFC Series . . . . . . . . . . 8 66 2.1.2.1. Representation to the IETF . . . . . . . . . . . 8 67 2.1.2.1.1. Volunteerism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 68 2.1.2.1.2. Policy Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 69 2.1.2.2. External Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 70 2.1.3. Development of RFC Production and Publication . . . . 10 71 2.1.4. Development of the RFC Series . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 72 2.1.5. Workload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 73 2.1.6. Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 74 2.1.7. Conflict of Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 75 2.2. RFC Production Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 76 2.3. RFC Publisher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 77 3. Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 78 3.1. RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) . . . . . . . . . . 13 79 3.1.1. RSOC Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 80 4. Administrative Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 81 4.1. Vendor Selection for the Production and Publisher 82 Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 83 4.2. Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 84 4.3. Disagreements among Entities Related to the RFC Editor . 18 85 4.4. Issues with Contractual Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 86 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 87 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 88 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 89 8. Change log [RFC Editor: Please remove] . . . . . . . . . . . 20 90 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 91 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 92 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 94 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 96 1. Introduction 98 This document reflects the experience gained with "RFC Editor Model 99 (Version 1)", documented in [RFC5620], and updates the RFC Editor 100 Model (Version 2) to be aligned with the new IASA 2.0 Model 101 [I-D.ietf-iasa2-struct] that creates a IETF Administration Limited 102 Liability Corporation ("LLC"), and a LLC Board. As part of the IASA 103 2.0 Model the Internet Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) is 104 eliminated, and its oversight and advising functions transferred to 105 the new LLC Board. This document obsoletes [RFC6635] to replace all 106 references to the IASA and related structures with those defined by 107 the IASA 2.0 Model. 109 The IAB, on behalf of the Internet technical community, is concerned 110 with ensuring the continuity of the RFC Series, orderly RFC Editor 111 succession, RFC quality, and RFC document accessibility. The IAB is 112 also sensitive to the concerns of the IETF Administration Limited 113 Liability Corporation (LLC) about providing the necessary services in 114 a cost-effective and efficient manner. 116 The contemporary RFC Editor model [RFC5620] was first approved in 117 October 2008, and our understanding of the model has evolved with our 118 experience since. During the implementation of version 1 of the 119 model [RFC5620], it was quickly realized that the role of the RFC 120 Series Editor (RSE) and the oversight responsibilities needed to be 121 structured differently. In order to gain experience with "running 122 code", a transitional RSE was hired who analyzed the managerial 123 environment and provided recommendations. This was followed by the 124 appointment of an acting RSE, who ably managed the series while work 125 was undertaken to select and hire a permanent RSE. This version of 126 the model is based on the recommendations of both temporary RFC 127 Series Editors and the extensive discussion in the IETF community, on 128 the rfc-interest list, and within the IAB. 130 This document, and the resulting structures, will be modified as 131 needed through normal procedures. The RSE, and the IAB, through the 132 RFC Oversight Committee (see Section 3.1), will continue to monitor 133 discussions within the community about potential adjustments to the 134 RFC Editor model and recognize that the process described in this 135 document may need to be adjusted to align with any changes that 136 result from such discussions; hence, the version number in the title. 138 The IAB maintains it's responsibilities as defined in [RFC2850]. 140 1.1. The RFC Editor Function 142 The RFC Series is described in [RFC4844]. Its Section 3.1 defines 143 "RFC Editor": 145 Originally, there was a single person acting as editor of the RFC 146 Series (the RFC Editor). The task has grown, and the work now 147 requires the organized activity of several experts, so there are 148 RFC Editors, or an RFC Editor organization. In time, there may be 149 multiple organizations working together to undertake the work 150 required by the RFC Series. For simplicity's sake, and without 151 attempting to predict how the role might be subdivided among them, 152 this document refers to this collection of experts and 153 organizations as the "RFC Editor". 155 The RFC Editor is an expert technical editor and series editor, 156 acting to support the mission of the RFC Series. As such, the RFC 157 Editor is the implementer handling the editorial management of the 158 RFC Series, in accordance with the defined processes. In 159 addition, the RFC Editor is expected to be the expert and prime 160 mover in discussions about policies for editing, publishing, and 161 archiving RFCs. 163 RFC 4844 does not explore the internal organization of the RFC 164 Editor. However, RFC 4844 envisions changes in the RFC Editor 165 organizational structure. There have been several iterations on 166 efforts to improve and clarify this structure. These have been led 167 by the IAB, in consultation with the community and many leadership 168 bodies within the community. This first resulted in the publication 169 of [RFC5620] and then in further discussions leading to this 170 document. Some of the details on this evolution can be found below. 171 In undertaking this evolution, the IAB considered changes that 172 increase flexibility and operational support options, provide for the 173 orderly succession of the RFC Editor, and ensure the continuity of 174 the RFC Series, while maintaining RFC quality, maintaining timely 175 processing, ensuring document accessibility, reducing costs, and 176 increasing cost transparency. The model set forth below describes 177 the internal organization of the RFC Editor, while remaining 178 consistent with RFC 4844. 180 Note that RFC 4844 uses the term "RFC Editor function" or "RFC 181 Editor" as the collective set of responsibilities for which this memo 182 provides a model for internal organization. This memo defines the 183 term "RFC Series Editor" or "Series Editor" for one of the 184 organizational components. 186 2. RFC Editor Model 188 The RFC Editor model divides the responsibilities for the RFC Series 189 into the following components: 191 o RFC Series Editor (RSE) 193 o RFC Production Center 195 o RFC Publisher 197 The structure and relationship of the components of the RFC Series 198 production and process is schematically represented by the figure 199 below. The picture does not depict oversight and escalation 200 relations. It does include the streams and their managers (which are 201 not part of the RFC Series Editor, the RFC Production Center, or 202 Publisher facilities) in order to more fully show the context in 203 which the RFC Series Editor operates. 205 +-------------+ 206 | | 207 +--------------+ IAB <------------+ 208 | | | | 209 | |=============| | 210 | | | | 211 | | RSOC <------------+ 212 | | | | 213 | +-------+-----+ +-----+-----+ 214 | | | | 215 | +...........|.........+ | Community | 216 | . | . | at | 217 | . +-------V-----+ . | Large | 218 | . | | . | | 219 | . | RFC | . +-----+-----+ 220 | . | Series | . | 221 | . | Editor <------------+ 222 | . | | . 223 | . +-+---------+-+ . 224 | . | | . 225 +-------------+ +-----V-------+ . +--V--+ +--V--+ . +-----+ 226 | | | | . | | | | . | | 227 | Independent | | Independent | . | RFC | | | . | E | 228 | Authors +--> Submission +-----> | | | . | n | 229 | | | Editor | . | P | | | . | d | 230 | | | | . | r | | RFC | . | | 231 +-------------+ +-------------+ . | o | | | . | U | 232 +-------------+ +-------------+ . | d | | P | . | s | 233 | | | | . | u | | u | . | e | 234 | IAB +--> IAB +-----> c | | b | . | r | 235 | | | | . | t | | l | . | s | 236 +-------------+ +-------------+ . | i +---> i +--------> | 237 +-------------+ +-------------+ . | o | | s | . | & | 238 | | | | . | n | | h | . | | 239 | IRTF +--> IRSG +---->| | | e | . | R | 240 | | | | . | C | | r | . | e | 241 +-------------+ +-------------+ . | e | | | . | a | 242 +-------------+ +-------------+ . | n | | | . | d | 243 | | | | . | t | | | . | e | 244 | IETF +--> IESG +-----> e | | | . | r | 245 | | | | . | r | | | . | s | 246 +-------------+ +-------------+ . +-----+ +-----+ . +-----+ 247 . . 248 +..... RFC Editor ....+ 250 Structure of RFC Series Production and Process 252 Figure 1 254 In this model, documents are produced and approved through multiple 255 document streams. The stream manager for each stream is responsible 256 for the content of that stream. The four streams that now exist are 257 described in [RFC4844]. The RFC Editor function is responsible for 258 the packaging and distribution of the documents. As such, documents 259 from these streams are edited and processed by the Production Center 260 and published by the Publisher. The RFC Series Editor will exercise 261 strategic leadership and management over the activities of the RFC 262 Publisher and the RFC Production Center (both of which can be seen as 263 back-office functions) and will be the entity that: 265 o Represents the RFC Series and the RFC Editor Function within the 266 IETF and externally. 268 o Leads the community in the design of improvements to the RFC 269 Series. 271 o Is responsible for planning and seeing to the execution of 272 improvements in the RFC Editor production and access processes. 274 o Is responsible for the content of the rfc-editor.org web site, 275 which is operated and maintained by the RFC Publisher. 277 o Is responsible for developing consensus versions of vision and 278 policy documents. These documents will be reviewed by the RFC 279 Series Oversight Committee (Section 3.1) and subject to its 280 approval before final publication. 282 These responsibilities are defined below, although the specific work 283 items under them are a matter for the actual employment contract and 284 its Statement of Work (SOW). 286 The IAB maintain it's chartered responsibility as defined in 287 [RFC2850] and [RFC4071]. More details on the oversight by the IAB 288 via the RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) can be found in 289 Section 3.1. For example, the RSE does not have the direct authority 290 to hire or fire RFC Editor contractors or personnel. 292 2.1. RFC Series Editor 294 The RFC Series Editor is the individual with overall responsibility 295 for the quality, continuity, and evolution of the RFC Series. 297 The RSE is appointed by the IAB, but formally hired by the LLC Board. 298 The IAB delegates the direct oversight over the RSE to the RSOC, 299 which it appoints. 301 The RSE is expected to cooperate closely with the LLC Board and the 302 stream managers. 304 2.1.1. Strategic Leadership and Management of the Publication and 305 Production Functions 307 With respect to the RFC Publisher and Production Center functions, 308 the RSE provides input to the LLC budget, SOWs, and manages vendor 309 selection processes. The RSE performs annual reviews of the RFC 310 Production Center and Publisher function, which are then provided to 311 the RSOC, the LLC, and the community. Normally, private financial 312 details would not be included in a public version unless the LLC 313 Board concludes it is necessary to make such information public. 315 The RSE is responsible for the performance of the RFC Production 316 Center and Publisher. The RSE is responsible for issues that go 317 beyond the RFC Production Center or Publisher functions, such as 318 cross-stream coordination of priorities. Issues that require changes 319 to the budget or contracts shall be brought to the attention of the 320 LLC Executive Director by the RSE. 322 The RSE is also responsible for creating documentation and structures 323 that will allow for continuity of the RFC Series in the face of 324 changes in contracts and personnel. 326 Vendor selection for the RFC Production Center and Publisher 327 functions is done in cooperation with the streams and under final 328 authority of the LLC. Details on this process can be found in 329 Section 4.1. 331 2.1.2. Representation of the RFC Series 333 The RSE is the primary representative of the RFC Series. This 334 representation is important both internally, relative to the IETF, 335 and externally. 337 2.1.2.1. Representation to the IETF 339 The RSE is the primary point of contact to the IETF on matters 340 relating to the RFC Series in general, or policy matters relating to 341 specific documents. Issues of practical details in the processing of 342 specific documents are generally worked through directly with the RFC 343 Production Center staff. 345 This includes providing suitable reports to the community at large, 346 providing email contact for policy questions and inputs, and enabling 347 and participating in suitable on-line forums for discussion of issues 348 related to the RFC Series. 350 Due to the history and nature of the interaction between the RSE and 351 the IETF, certain principles, described in the following subsections, 352 must be understood and adhered to by the RSE in his or her 353 interactions with the community. These apply to the representation 354 function, as well as to the leadership the RSE provides for 355 production and series development. 357 2.1.2.1.1. Volunteerism 359 The vast majority of Internet technical community work is led, 360 initiated, and done by community volunteers, including oversight, 361 policy making, and direct production of, for example, many software 362 tools. The RSE, while not a volunteer, is dependent upon these 363 volunteer participants. Also, the spirit of the community is heavily 364 focused on and draws from these volunteers. As such, the RSE needs 365 to support the vitality and effectiveness of volunteer participation. 367 2.1.2.1.2. Policy Authority 369 All decisions are to be made in the overall interest of the broader 370 Internet community. The RSE is responsible for identifying 371 materially concerned interest groups within the Internet community 372 and reaching out to them. Those interest groups include at least the 373 IETF community, the IRTF community, the network research community, 374 and the network operations community. Other interest groups might 375 also be materially interested. 377 The RSE must consult with the community on policy issues. The RSE 378 works with the community to achieve policy that meets the overall 379 quality, continuity, and evolution goals the RSE is charged with 380 meeting. As described in Section 3.1, the RSE reports the results of 381 such interactions to the RSOC, including a description of the 382 outreach efforts and the specific recommendations on policy. This 383 enables the RSOC to provide the oversight the IAB is required to 384 apply, as well as to confirm that the Internet community has been 385 properly consulted and considered in making policy. 387 2.1.2.2. External Representation 389 From time to time, individuals or organizations external to the IETF 390 need a contact person to talk to about the RFC Series. The RSE, or 391 the RSE's designate, serves this role. 393 Over time, the RSE should determine what, if any, means should be 394 employed to increase end-user awareness of the series, to reinforce 395 the stature of the series, and to provide the contact point for 396 outside parties seeking information on the series or the Editor. 398 2.1.3. Development of RFC Production and Publication 400 Closely related to providing strategic leadership and management to 401 the RFC Production Center and Publisher functions is the need to 402 develop and improve those functions. The RSE is responsible for 403 ensuring that such ongoing development takes place. 405 This effort must include the dimensions of document quality, 406 timeliness of production, and accessibility of results. It must also 407 specifically take into account issues raised by the IETF community, 408 including all the streams feeding into the RFC Editor function. 410 2.1.4. Development of the RFC Series 412 In order to develop the RFC Series, the RSE is expected to develop a 413 relationship with the Internet technical community. The Editor is 414 expected to engage with the Internet technical community in a process 415 of articulating and refining a vision for the series and its 416 continuous evolution. The RSE is also expected to engage other users 417 of the RFC Series, in particular, the consumers of these documents, 418 such as those people who use them to specify products, write code, 419 test behaviors, or other related activities. 421 Concretely: 423 The RSE is responsible for the coordination of discussion on 424 series evolution among the series' stream participants and the 425 broader Internet technical community. 427 In time, the RSE is expected to develop and refine a vision for 428 the RFC Series, including examining: 430 * The RFC Series, as it continues to evolve. The RSE is expected 431 to take a broad view and look for the best ways to evolve the 432 series for the benefit of the entire Internet community. As 433 such, the RSE may even consider evolution beyond the historical 434 'by engineers for engineers' emphasis; and 436 * Its publication-technical environment, by looking at whether it 437 should be slowly changing in terms of publishing and archiving 438 techniques -- particularly to better serve the communities that 439 produce and depend on the RFC Series. For example, all of 440 those communities have been slowly changing to include a 441 significant population of multi-lingual individuals or non- 442 native speakers of English. Another example is that some of 443 these constituencies also have shifted to include significant 444 groups whose primary focus is on the constraints and 445 consequences of network engineering, rather than a primary 446 interest in the engineering issues themselves. 448 For this type of responsibility, the RSE cooperates closely with the 449 community, and operates under oversight of the RSOC: thus, 450 ultimately, under oversight of the IAB. 452 2.1.5. Workload 454 On average, the job is expected to take half of a full-time 455 equivalent position (FTE, thus approx 20 hrs per week), with the 456 workload per week nearing full time during IETF weeks. In addition, 457 the job is expected to take more than 20 hours per week in the first 458 few months of the engagement and when involved in special projects. 460 2.1.6. Qualifications 462 The RFC Series Editor is a senior technology professional. The 463 following qualifications are desired: 465 1. Strategic leadership and management experience fulfilling the 466 requirements outlined in this document, the many aspects of this 467 role, and the coordination of the overall RFC Editor process. 469 2. Good understanding of the English language and technical 470 terminology related to the Internet. 472 3. Good communication skills. 474 4. Experience with editorial processes. 476 5. Ability to develop strong understanding of the IETF and RFC 477 process. 479 6. Independent worker. 481 7. Willingness to, and availability for, travel. 483 8. The ability to work effectively in a multi-actor and matrixed 484 environment with divided authority and responsibility similar to 485 that described in this document. 487 9. Experience with and ability to participate in, and manage, 488 activities by email and teleconferences, not just face-to-face 489 interactions. 491 10. Demonstrated experience in strategic planning and the management 492 of entire operations. 494 11. Experience as an RFC author. 496 2.1.7. Conflict of Interest 498 The RSE is expected to avoid even the appearance of conflict of 499 interest or judgment in performing these roles. As such, the RSE is 500 barred from having any ownership, advisory, or other relationship to 501 the vendors executing the RFC Publisher or Production Center 502 functions except as specified elsewhere in this document. If 503 necessary, an exception can be made after public disclosure of those 504 relationships and with the explicit permission of the IAB and LLC 505 Board. 507 2.2. RFC Production Center 509 The RFC Production Center function is performed by a paid contractor, 510 and the contractor's responsibilities include the following: 512 1. Editing inputs from all RFC streams to comply with the RFC Style 513 Manual, under the direction of the RSE; 515 2. Creating records of edits performed on documents; 517 3. Identifying where editorial changes might have technical impact 518 and seeking necessary clarification; 520 4. Engaging in dialog with authors, document shepherds, IANA, and/ 521 or stream-dependent contacts when clarification is needed; 523 5. Creating records of dialog with document authors; 525 6. Requesting advice from the RFC Series Editor as needed; 527 7. Providing suggestions to the RFC Series Editor as needed; 529 8. Providing sufficient resources to support reviews of RFC 530 Publisher performance by the RFC Series Editor and external 531 reviews of the RFC Editor function initiated by the IAB or LLC 532 Board; 534 9. Coordinating with IANA to ensure correct documentation of IANA- 535 performed protocol registry actions; 537 10. Assigning RFC numbers; 539 11. Establishing publication readiness of each document through 540 communication with the authors, document shepherds, IANA, and/or 541 stream-dependent contacts, and, if needed, with the RFC Series 542 Editor; 544 12. Forwarding documents that are ready for publication to the RFC 545 Publisher; 547 13. Forwarding records of edits and author dialog to the RFC 548 Publisher so these can be preserved; 550 14. Liaising with the streams as needed. 552 All these activities will be done under the general direction, but 553 not day-to-day management, of the RSE and need some level of 554 coordination with various submission streams and the RSE. 556 The RFC Production Center contractor is to be selected through an LLC 557 Request for Proposal (RFP) process as described in Section 4.1. 559 2.3. RFC Publisher 561 The RFC Publisher responsibilities include the following: 563 1. Announcing and providing on-line access to RFCs. 565 2. Providing an on-line system to submit RFC Errata. 567 3. Providing on-line access to approved RFC Errata. 569 4. Providing backups. 571 5. Providing storage and preservation of records. 573 6. Authenticating RFCs for legal proceedings. 575 All these activities will be done under the general direction, but 576 not day-to-day management, of the RSE and need some level of 577 coordination with various submission streams and the RSE. 579 The RFC Publisher contractor is to be selected through an LLC RFP 580 process as described in Section 4.1. 582 3. Committees 584 3.1. RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) 586 The IAB is responsible for the oversight of the RFC Series and acts 587 as a body for final conflict resolution, including the process 588 described in Section 4.3. 590 In order to provide continuity over periods longer than the NomCom 591 appointment cycle [RFC3777] and assure that oversight includes 592 suitable subject matter expertise, the IAB will establish a group 593 that implements oversight for the IAB, the RFC Series Oversight 594 Committee (RSOC). 596 The RSOC will act with authority delegated from the IAB: in general, 597 it will be the RSOC that will approve consensus policy and vision 598 documents as developed by the RSE in collaboration with the 599 community. While it is expected that the IAB will exercise due 600 diligence in its supervision of the RSOC, the RSOC should be allowed 601 the latitude to do its job without undue interference from the IAB. 602 Therefore, it is expected that the IAB will accord RSOC reports and 603 recommendations the benefit of the doubt. 605 For all decisions that affect the RSE individually (e.g., hiring and 606 firing), the RSOC prepares recommendations for the IAB, but the final 607 decision is the responsibility of the IAB. For instance the RSOC 608 would do the following: 610 o perform annual reviews of the RSE and report the result of these 611 reviews to the IAB. 613 o manage RSE candidate selection and advise the IAB on candidate 614 appointment (in other words, select the RSE subject to IAB 615 approval). 617 RSOC members are expected to recognize potential conflicts of 618 interest and behave accordingly. 620 For the actual recruitment and selection of the RSE, the RSOC will 621 propose a budget for the search process. It will work with the LLC 622 Board to refine that budget and develop remuneration criteria and an 623 employment agreement or contracting plans, as appropriate. 625 The RSOC will be responsible for ensuring that the RFC Series is run 626 in a transparent and accountable manner. 628 The RSOC shall develop and publish its own rules of order. 630 The initial RSOC was charged with designing and executing a 631 solicitation, search, and selection process for the first actual (not 632 transitional or "acting") RSE appointment. That process involved 633 iteration on this and related documents and evaluation of various 634 strategies and options. During the creation of this document, it was 635 expected that the RSOC would describe the process it ultimately 636 selected to the community. The RSOC did involve the community in 637 interim considerations when that was likely to be of value. 639 Following completion of the selection process, the RSOC will 640 determine the best way to share information learned and experience 641 gained with the community and determine how to best preserve that 642 information for future use. 644 3.1.1. RSOC Composition 646 The RSOC will operate under the authority of the IAB, with the IAB 647 retaining final responsibility. The IAB will delegate authority and 648 responsibility to the RSOC as appropriate and as RSOC and RSE 649 relationships evolve. The RSOC will include people who are not 650 current IAB members. Currently, this is aligned with the IAB program 651 structure. The IAB will designate the membership of the RSOC with 652 the following goals: preserving effective stability; keeping it small 653 enough to be effective, and keeping it large enough to provide 654 general Internet community expertise, specific IETF expertise, 655 publication expertise, and stream expertise. Members serve at the 656 pleasure of the IAB and are expected to bring a balance between 657 short- and long-term perspectives. Specific input about, and 658 recommendations of, members will be sought from the streams, the LLC, 659 and the RSE. 661 In addition to the members from outside of the IAB appointed to the 662 RSOC, IAB members may participate as full members of the RSOC. Under 663 most circumstances, there will be a specific individual IAB member 664 appointed by the IAB as the program lead, who will be a full member 665 of the RSOC. This member's role is distinct from any RSOC-internal 666 organizational roles, such as would be created by the RSOC choosing 667 to appoint a chair from among its members. Other IAB members may 668 choose to be full members of the RSOC, with the consent of the IAB. 669 This consent is primarily concerned with avoiding overpopulating the 670 RSOC and providing it with relatively stable membership, which will 671 work best if it is not too large a committee. 673 The LLC Board will appoint an individual to serve as its liaison to 674 the RSOC. The RSE and the LLC Board Liaison will serve as non-voting 675 ex officio members of the RSOC. Either or both can be excluded from 676 its discussions if necessary. 678 4. Administrative Implementation 680 The exact implementation of the administrative and contractual 681 activities described here are a responsibility of the IETF 682 Administration Limited Liability Corporation Board 683 [I-D.ietf-iasa2-struct] in cooperation with the RFC Series Editor. 684 The authority structure is described in Figure 2 below. 686 +----------------+ +----------------+ 687 | | | | 688 | IAB | | LLC Board | 689 | | | | 690 +==========+-----+ +-+--------------+ 691 | | . 692 | RSOC | . 693 | | . 694 +----+-----+ . 695 | . 696 | . 697 | ................... 698 | . . 699 +--------V---V----+ . 700 | | . 701 | RFC | . 702 | Series | . 703 | Editor | . 704 | | . 705 +--------+--------+ . 706 | . 707 | ................. 708 | . . 709 +--+----------------+ . 710 | . | . 711 | . | . 712 +---V-----V--+ +--V----V---+ 713 | RFC | | RFC | 714 | Production | | Publisher | 715 | Center | | | 716 +------------+ +-----------+ 718 Authority Structure of the RFC Series 720 Legend: 722 ------- IAB RFC Series Oversight 723 ....... LLC Board Contract/Budget Oversight 725 Figure 2 727 4.1. Vendor Selection for the Production and Publisher Functions 729 As stated earlier, vendor selection is done in cooperation with the 730 streams and under the final authority of the LLC Board. 732 The RSE owns and develops the work definition (the SOW) and 733 participates in the LLC vendor selection process. The work 734 definition is created within the LLC budget and takes into account 735 the stream managers and community input. 737 The process to select and contract for an RFC Production Center, RFC 738 Publisher, and other RFC-related services, is as follows: 740 o The LLC Board establishes the contract process, including the 741 steps necessary to issue an RFP when necessary, the timing, and 742 the contracting procedures. 744 o The LLC Board establishes the Selection Committee, which will 745 consist of the RSE, the LLC Executive Director, and other members 746 selected by the RSOC and the LLC Board. The Committee shall be 747 chaired by the RSE. 749 o The Selection Committee selects the vendor, subject to the 750 successful negotiation of a contract approved by the LLC Board. 751 In the event that a contract cannot be reached, the matter shall 752 be referred to the Selection Committee for further action. 754 o The Selection Committee may select an RFC Publisher either through 755 the LLC RFP process or, at the Committee's option, the Committee 756 may select the IETF Secretariat to provide RFC Publisher services, 757 subject to negotiations in accordance with the LLC procedures. 759 4.2. Budget 761 The expenses discussed in this document are not new expenses. They 762 have been and remain part of the IETF Administration Limited 763 Liability Corporation [I-D.ietf-iasa2-struct] budget. 765 The RFC Series portion of the LLC budget shall include entries for 766 the RSOC, RSE, RFC Production Center, and the RFC Publisher. The LLC 767 budget shall also include entries for the streams, including the 768 independent stream. 770 The LLC Board has the responsibility to approve the total RFC Editor 771 budget (and the authority to deny it). The RSE must work within the 772 LLC Board budgetary process. 774 The RSE is responsible for managing the RFC Editor function to 775 operate within those budgets. If production needs change, the RSE is 776 responsible for working with the Production Center, and where 777 appropriate, other RFC Editor component institutions, relevant 778 streams, and/or the RSOC to determine what the correct response 779 should be. If they agree that a budgetary change is needed, that 780 decision needs to be taken to the LLC Executive Director and the LLC 781 Board. 783 4.3. Disagreements among Entities Related to the RFC Editor 785 The RFC Series Editor and the RFC Production Center and Publisher 786 facilities work with the various streams to produce RFCs. 787 Disagreements may arise between these entities during the execution 788 of the RFC Editor operations. In particular, different streams may 789 disagree with each other, or disagree with the RFC Editor function. 790 Potentially, even the RSOC or the LLC Board could find themselves in 791 disagreement with some aspect of the RFC Editor operations. Note 792 that disagreements between an author and the RFC Production Center 793 are not cross-entity issues, and they are to be resolved by the RSE, 794 in accordance with the rest of this document. 796 If such cross-entity disagreements arise, the community would 797 generally hope that they can be resolved politely and directly. 798 However, this is not always possible. At that point, any relevant 799 party would first formally request a review and reconsideration of 800 the decision. If the party still disagrees after the 801 reconsideration, that party may ask the RSE to decide or, especially 802 if the RSE is involved, the party may ask the IAB Chair (for a 803 technical or procedural matter) to mediate or appoint a mediator to 804 aid in the discussions, although he or she not is obligated to do so. 805 All parties should work informally and in good faith to reach a 806 mutually agreeable conclusion. As noted below, any such issues that 807 involve contractual matters must be brought to the attention of the 808 LLC Board. If the IAB Chair is asked to assist in resolving the 809 matter, the Chair may ask for advice or seek assistance from anyone 810 the Chair deems helpful. The Chair may also alert any appropriate 811 individuals or organizations to the existence of the issue. 813 If such a conclusion is not possible through the above less formal 814 processes, then the matter must be registered with the RFC Series 815 Oversight Committee. The RSOC may choose to offer advice to the RSE 816 or more general advice to the parties involved and may ask the RSE to 817 defer a decision until it formulates its advice. However, if a 818 timely decision cannot be reached through discussion, mediation, and 819 mutual agreement, the RSE is expected to make whatever decisions are 820 needed to ensure the smooth operation of the RFC Editor function; 821 those decisions are final. 823 The RSE may make final decisions unilaterally only to assure the 824 functioning of the process, and only while there is an evaluation of 825 current policies to determine whether they are appropriately 826 implemented in the decision or need adjustment. In particular, it 827 should be noted that final decisions about the technical content of 828 individual documents are the exclusive responsibility of the stream 829 approvers from which those documents originate, as shown in the 830 illustration in Figure 1. 832 If informal agreements cannot be reached, then formal RSOC review and 833 decision making may be required. If so, the RSE must present the 834 issues involved to the community so that the community is aware of 835 the situation. The RSE will then report the issue to the RSOC for 836 formal resolution by the RSOC with confirmation by the IAB in its 837 oversight capacity. 839 IAB and community discussion of any patterns of disputes are expected 840 to inform future changes to RFC Series policies, including possible 841 updates to this document. 843 4.4. Issues with Contractual Impact 845 If a disagreement or decision has immediate or future contractual 846 consequences, it falls under BCP 101 [RFC4071] and LLC; thus, the RSE 847 must identify the issue and provide his or her advice to the LLC 848 Board; additionally, if the RSOC has provided advice, forward that 849 advice as well. The LLC Board must notify the RSOC and IAB regarding 850 the action it concludes is required to resolve the issue based on its 851 applicable procedures and provisions in the relevant contracts. 853 5. IANA Considerations 855 This document defines several functions within the overall RFC Editor 856 structure, and it places the responsibility for coordination of 857 registry value assignments with the RFC Production Center. The LLC 858 Board will facilitate the establishment of the relationship between 859 the RFC Production Center and IANA. 861 This document does not create a new registry nor does it register any 862 values in existing registries, and no IANA action is required. 864 6. Security Considerations 866 The same security considerations as those in [RFC4844] apply. The 867 processes for the publication of documents must prevent the 868 introduction of unapproved changes. Since the RFC Editor maintains 869 the index of publications, sufficient security must be in place to 870 prevent these published documents from being changed by external 871 parties. The archive of RFC documents, any source documents needed 872 to recreate the RFC documents, and any associated original documents 873 (such as lists of errata, tools, and, for some early items, originals 874 that are not machine readable) need to be secured against any kind of 875 data storage failure. 877 The LLC Board should take these security considerations into account 878 during the implementation and enforcement of the RFC Editor component 879 contracts. 881 7. Acknowledgments 883 The RFC Editor model was conceived and discussed in hallways and on 884 mailing lists. The first iteration of the text on which this 885 document is based was first written by Leslie Daigle, Russ Housley, 886 and Ray Pelletier. In addition to the members of the IAOC and IAB in 887 conjunction with those roles, major and minor contributions were made 888 by (in alphabetical order): Bob Braden, Brian Carpenter, Sandy 889 Ginoza, Alice Russo, Joel M. Halpern, Alfred Hoenes, Paul Hoffman, 890 John Klensin, Subramanian Moonesamy, and Jim Schaad. 892 The IAOC members at the time this RFC Editor model was approved were 893 (in alphabetical order): Bernard Aboba (ex officio), Eric Burger, 894 Dave Crocker, Marshall Eubanks, Bob Hinden, Russ Housley (ex 895 officio), Ole Jacobsen, Ray Pelletier (non-voting), and Lynn St. 896 Amour (ex officio). 898 The IAB members at the time the initial RFC Editor model was approved 899 were (in alphabetical order): Loa Andersson, Gonzalo Camarillo, 900 Stuart Cheshire, Russ Housley, Olaf Kolkman, Gregory Lebovitz, Barry 901 Leiba, Kurtis Lindqvist, Andrew Malis, Danny McPherson, David Oran, 902 Dave Thaler, and Lixia Zhang. In addition, the IAB included two ex 903 officio members: Dow Street, who was serving as the IAB Executive 904 Director, and Aaron Falk, who was serving as the IRTF Chair. 906 The IAB members at the time the this RFC was approved were (in 907 alphabetical order): Bernard Aboba, Ross Callon, Alissa Cooper, 908 Spencer Dawkins, Joel Halpern, Russ Housley, David Kessens, Olaf 909 Kolkman, Danny McPherson, Jon Peterson, Andrei Robachevsky, Dave 910 Thaler, and Hannes Tschofenig. In addition, at the time of approval, 911 the IAB included two ex officio members: Mary Barnes who was serving 912 as the IAB Executive Director, and Lars Eggert, who was serving as 913 the IRTF Chair. 915 Bob Hinden served as documented editor for this version of this 916 document that aligned it with the IASA 2.0 model. 918 8. Change log [RFC Editor: Please remove] 920 draft-hinden-iasa2-rfc6635bis-01, 2018-July-6 922 * Changed occurrences of IASA to IETF Administration Limited 923 Liability Corporation ("LLC"). 925 * Changed occurrences of IAOC to LLC Board. 926 * Changed occurrences of IAD to LLC Executive Director. 927 * Added paragraph to introduction about purpose of this version 928 of the document, and updated Abstract similarly. 929 * Added new editor to acknowledgement section. 930 * Changed document to now oboslete RFC6635. 932 draft-hinden-iasa2-rfc6635bis-00, 2018-July-6 934 * Original version with only changes from RFC6635 were to convert 935 to ID format. 937 9. References 939 9.1. Normative References 941 [RFC4844] Daigle, L., Ed. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC 942 Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, DOI 10.17487/RFC4844, 943 July 2007, . 945 [RFC4071] Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the 946 IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101, RFC 947 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005, . 950 [RFC2850] Internet Architecture Board and B. Carpenter, Ed., 951 "Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB)", BCP 952 39, RFC 2850, DOI 10.17487/RFC2850, May 2000, 953 . 955 [RFC6635] Kolkman, O., Ed., Halpern, J., Ed., and IAB, "RFC Editor 956 Model (Version 2)", RFC 6635, DOI 10.17487/RFC6635, June 957 2012, . 959 [I-D.ietf-iasa2-struct] 960 Haberman, B., Hall, J., and J. Livingood, "Proposed 961 Structure of the IETF Administrative Support Activity 962 (IASA), Version 2.0", draft-ietf-iasa2-struct-03 (work in 963 progress), July 2018. 965 9.2. Informative References 967 [RFC5620] Kolkman, O., Ed. and IAB, "RFC Editor Model (Version 1)", 968 RFC 5620, DOI 10.17487/RFC5620, August 2009, 969 . 971 [RFC3777] Galvin, J., Ed., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, 972 and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall 973 Committees", RFC 3777, DOI 10.17487/RFC3777, June 2004, 974 . 976 Authors' Addresses 978 Olaf M. Kolkman (editor) 980 EMail: olaf@nlnetlabs.nl 982 Joel M. Halpern (editor) 983 Ericsson 985 EMail: joel.halpern@ericsson.com 987 Internet Architecture Board 989 EMail: iab@iab.org 991 Robert M. Hinden (editor) 992 Check Point Software 993 959 Skyway Road 994 San Carlos, CA 94070 995 USA 997 EMail: bob.hinden@gmail.com