Ran,
RJ Atkinson wrote:
There was an understanding then that the
RFC Editor's role extends far beyond just publishing IETF-sponsored
documents. I am concerned that this is not being acknowledged now.
I would feel a lot better if there were more public acknowledgement
that the RFC Editor's role extends far beyond the IETF-sponsored
documents.
It may have been true in 1993.
At the moment, the part of the RFC Editor's role that extends beyond the
IETF-sponsored documents is a small fraction (5%?) of the RFC Editor's
output, and, I suspect, an even smaller fraction of the motivation for
people and organizations to sponsor the RFC Editor; *all* of the funding
for the RFC Editor comes through ISOC.
At this moment, the RFC Editor is a function controlled, for better or
worse, by the IETF. The IETF may choose to use the RFC process for other
purposes than publishing IETF documents (and I think it should).
But I do not believe that the concept of an RFC Editor that is
independent of the IETF is a sustainable model at this time.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf