On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 11:46 AM Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let's get one more clarification:
As far as I can tell, the order in which things happened was:
1) The RSOC decided to renew then cancel the contract for "RFP purposes" - that RSOC meeting had the two IAB members Christian and Robert attending and agreeing.2) The IAB meeting reviewed the "decision"/"recommendation" and allowed it to go forward.3) The RSOC with the IAB's consent or at least knowledge absent dissent sent a note to Heather indicating the renew/cancel decision.
4) Heather declined the extension for the reasons previously stated.
So Q1: Is the above time line correct? If not please clarify.
No. It is neither correct as to timeline nor as to process. To reiterate:
The RSOC decided to recommend to the IAB the current contract renewed for 2 years. Their recommendation also included this text:
"Our full recommendation is to reup at the end of this year, and then go out
to bid in 2021 for the 2022 timeframe. The decision to rebid is
explicitly not a comment on Heathers performance as RSE, but rather,
our desire to collect more data and refine the process."
to bid in 2021 for the 2022 timeframe. The decision to rebid is
explicitly not a comment on Heathers performance as RSE, but rather,
our desire to collect more data and refine the process."
Before the IAB meeting occurred in which this would ne discussed, the IAB received Heather's notice that she did not choose to renew. Since these renewals are by mutual agreement, that is entirely at her discretion. Because of her decision, none of the rest of the activity in the normal process (IAB consideration of the recommendation, IETF LLC renewing, etc.) took place.
Q2-4: Is there *any* indication that anyone from the RSOC told Heather this was not the final decision and that it was subject to IAB approval and subsequent LLC approval?
The RSOC's message to the RSE noted that it was the recommendation going to the IAB. Since Heather has gone through this multiple times before, she is familiar with this process. The only change from previous renewals or contract awards was the shift from IAOC to IETF LLC, which would be at a later stage of the process.
I'm having problems with this being cast as a misunderstanding of the state of the process.
My apologies if what I wrote was read to say that she did not understand. I believe Heather's note indicates she understood the state of the process. The clarifications on the process were for members of the community who may not have lived with RFC 6635 as long as she has done.
regards,
Ted Hardie
