For your quote let's insert a single word in the key sentence "for".
"The Internet Society, on behalf of the IETF, has contracted [for] the RFC Editor function to
the Networking Division of the USC Information Sciences Institute (ISI) in Marina del Rey, CA."
See my point? Inserting a single word can change the meaning. You can't take a sentence that may or may not have been written with this attention to detail and make the assumption that it has the meaning you say it has.
A substantial part of ARPA contracting was simply to pay good people to do good things for the greater good and paying Jon et al was simply that. The Internet Standards stuff is an add-on to the original charter of the RFC editor and the old stuff wasn't removed when ISOC started funding the group - that at least is clear because we're having this discussion.
"Today, the "Network Working Group" should be interpreted as the set of users, vendors, and researchers who are working to improve and extend the Internet, in particular under the ISOC/IETF umbrella."
I read that as the Network Working Group is inclusive of the those under the ISOC/IETF umbrella but includes others, not exclusive of everyone else as you seem to imply. I'm pretty sure they (the RFC Editor Staff) do to.
All I'm saying - all I keep saying is that the focus of the IAB (and this specific document) should be on the Internet Standards series and how to make sure its requirements are taken into account when a contract is let for publishing such standards. If that contract is let to ISI I would expect it to continue under the RFC imprint. If that contract is let to another organization, I wouldn't expect it to continue under the RFC imprint and I'm OK with that.
Alternately (and for about the third time), suggest someone ask ISI politely to transfer the RFC series and RFC editor term to ISOC for license to whatever organization gets selected as the standards publisher.
Bolded the above because they keep getting missed.
Mike
At 02:43 PM 6/10/2006, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
Hi Mike,
> Two organizations: IAB and RFC Editor
> Two document series: Internet Standards and RFCs
>
> The RFC Editor through agreement with the IAB and with funding
> from the ISOC publishes the Internet Standards series under the
> banner of the RFC Series.
I'll grant that you have a much longer history in the IETF than I do, but
your characerization of the RFC Editor situation doesn't seem to match the
various public sources I've been able to find regarding the current status
of this work.
For instance, the RFC Editor web site says:
" 1. The RFC Editor was once Jon Postel; who is it today?
The RFC Editor is no longer a single person, it is a
small group of people. The Internet Society, on behalf
of the IETF, has contracted the RFC Editor function to
the Networking Division of the USC Information Sciences
Institute (ISI) in Marina del Rey, CA. ISI played a key
role in the development of the Internet, and Jon Postel
was the Director of ISI'S Networking Division for many
years. For an historical account of the RFC series, see
"30 Years of RFCs"."
If ISOC (on behalf of the IETF) has contracted the RFC Editor function to
ISI, then ISOC (on behalf of the IETF) could contract it to someone else. I
am not saying that we should. IMO, ISI has been doing an excellent job of
fulfilling the RFC Editor role, especially over the last year or so, when
they have virtually eliminated the backlogs that had plagued us in the past.
The RFC Editor web site also says:
"2. Every RFC is attributed to the "Network Working Group". What
working group is that?
This label in the heading of every RFC is historical in
form and symbolic in content. Historically, "network working
group" meant the set of researchers who developed the packet
switching protocols for the ARPAnet, beginning in 1969. This
label is maintained on RFCs as a reminder of the long and
significant technical history that is recorded in the RFC series,
and as a reminder that today's technical decisions, wise or not,
may be with us for many years. Today, the "Network Working Group"
should be interpreted as the set of users, vendors, and researchers
who are working to improve and extend the Internet, in particular
under the ISOC/IETF umbrella."
So, it appears that all RFCs are currently published under the ISOC/IETF
umbrella.
I am not arguing with the history you have presented, but I think that
things may have changed since the days when DARPA funded the RFC series. At
this point, even the RFC Editor acknowledges that they are publishing all
RFCs under the ISOC/IETF umbrella, and that ISI is contracted by ISOC to do
so.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf