RFC Editor Future Development Program - IETF Datatracker
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
RFC Editor Future Development Program
Note Well (Break out the reading glasses)
This is a reminder of IETF policies in effect on various topics such as patents or code of conduct. It is only meant to point you in the right
direction. Exceptions may apply. The IETF's patent policy and the definition of an IETF "contribution" and "participation" are set forth in BCP
79; please read it carefully.
As a reminder:
By participating in the IETF, you agree to follow IETF processes and policies.
If you are aware that any IETF contribution is covered by patents or patent applications that are owned or controlled by you or your sponsor,
you must disclose that fact, or not participate in the discussion.
As a participant in or attendee to any IETF activity you acknowledge that written, audio, video, and photographic records of meetings may be
made public.
Personal information that you provide to IETF will be handled in accordance with the IETF Privacy Statement
As a participant or attendee, you agree to work respectfully with other participants; please contact the ombudsteam.
(https://www.ietf.org/contact/ombudsteam/) if you have questions or concerns about this.
Definitive information is in the documents listed below and other IETF BCPs. For advice, please talk to WG chairs or ADs:
BCP 9 (Internet Standards Process)
BCP 25 (Working Group processes)
BCP 25 (Anti-Harassment Procedures)
BCP 54 (Code of Conduct)
BCP 78 (Copyright)
BCP 79 (Patents, Participation)
https://www.ietf.org/privacy-policy/ (Privacy Policy)
10.11.21 2Agenda 1. Note Well 2. Agenda Bashing (2 mins) 3. Timeline (2 minutes) 4. Q&A from the community (no more than 13 minutes) 5. Issues (40 minutes) 6. AOB 10.11.21 3
Chairs’ Proposed Approval Flow and Schedule
When What How long
28 Sep 2021 Last meeting Done
7 Oct 2021 Closing remaining issues (assumes no controversy) Done*
11 Oct 2021 Peter to publish -05 with Issues marked as to be removed by RFC Editor or removed Done
11 Oct 2021 IAB internal review of -05 and draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter.txt 2 weeks
12 Oct 2021 WGLC Equivalent and discussion; “Shepherd review” (chairs looking for any additional issues the Done
program may want to considered)
15 Nov 2021 -06 if needed Not yet
done
Timing and
1 Dec 2021 Begin community review: IETF, IESG, IAB, LLC, IRTF, copy to ISOC BOT, and anyone else. 6 weeks
approvals
Asynch IETF meeting: resolve early comments, gendispatch for draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter.txt, draft-rsalz-
2028bis, draft-rosen-rfced-update-2026
governed
1 Dec 2021 AD review of draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter.txt, resolve community review comments 2 weeks
by RFC 4845
15 January 2022 Updates based on community review, LC draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter.txt
and BCP 9
End of Jan 2022 IAB approval of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfc-model (hold for IAB charter update)
Directly Begin formation of RSAB, RSWG 1 month
afterwards
End of Jan 2022 IESG approval of draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter.txt, IAB release hold on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfc-model
15 Feb 2022 Formation of RSWG, RSAB complete, RFCEFDP Program concludes
This assumes no more substantial issuesQuestions?
Open (Mostly) Editorial Issues
Issue # Heading Status Anticipated next step
106 Editorial: first sentence of the abstract Editorial Leave to editor
Be slightly clearer on what has changed
107 What are the updates to other RFCs? (notably 8730, but also 7841) Leave to editor
111 Selection committees (again) Editorial Leave to editor
112 RPC SOW (editorial) Editorial Leave to editor
Section on External Representation does only consider incoming requests but Duplicate of #83. Section header may
121 not actual representation get edited. Leave to editor
RPC under authority of the IETF LLC => "as contractually overseen by the IETF
122 LLC" Editorial Accept
Mentioned in MSJ review- not editorial,
124 Minor tweak to cover legacy RFC editor documents but does not change our intent. Accept
126 Point in time RPC responsibilities Not editorial, but no change to intent. Leave to editor
130 §3.1.2 s/should choose/chooses or shall choose/ Editorial Leave to editor BUT… normative language?
131 7282->2418 citation Editorial Leave to editor
133 A member of the community -> a person Editorial Leave to editor
10.11.21 6Where we seem to have agreement to accept
Issue # Heading Status Anticipated next step
86 Editorial: add referece to draft-carpenter-iab-charter Text in working copy Accept
104 Temporary RSCE Proposed text from Jay Accept
Ties to John Levine comments- text
105 RPC responsibilities missing a couple of responsibilities proposed on list seems to have support Accept
108 Remove word ultimate Support to remove Accept
109 Do we want to write the existence of rfc-interest into the draft? Proposed word change by Brian Accept
114 Simpler process for certain changes Proposed text Accept
119 Heritage Proposed text Accept
125 Be more specific about persons when raising concerns Proposed text on list Accept
128 Permit RSCE not to wait to be consulted Proposed text Accept
132 What happens if vote doesn’t pass Proposed text Accept
10.11.21 7No support
Issue # Heading Status Anticipated next step
No consensus- some support for three
97 3-month restart timer months from RSWG approval Close
113 Editorial Expertise Concerns No proposed changes Close
Key design choice and issue raised
115 No accountability earlier Close
Already proposed and rejected by group
116 Initial list of RFCs for editorial stream? (and no support) Close
118 Costs hidden? Discussion requested Close
No support, and was previously
120 Performance target text tweak discussed (level of detail) Close
10.11.21 8Discuss
Issue # Heading Status Anticipated next step
93 Appeals against RSAB decisions Proposed text from Martin Discuss
94 Who resolves disputes when they need to be timely? Proposed text from Martin Discuss
RSWG for everything?
117 RPC responsibilities and the community Lots of discussion on list Discuss
129 RSWG Chairs issue community last call instead of RSAB Different views Discuss
10.11.21 9Working off the issue tracker
Any other business
Acknowledgments • By Casanovan - Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10631382
You can also read
