On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 1:39 PM Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm happy to include IRTF and ISE; their omission was a simple
> oversight. But even if we expand my statment to say "The primary way
> the RFC editor adds value is by publishing IAB/IETF/IRTF/ISE
> documents", then wouldn't the natural course be, for example, for the
> owners of those streams to collectively oversee the RFC editor?
as those august bodies oversaw postel, braden, ... oh wait.
For those who have not had to look it all up recently, the IAB's role here has evolved as the RFC Editor model has evolved, but the appointment function goes back to at least RFC 1358 (see section 8) in 1992. That was adjusted slightly in RFC 1601 when NomCom appointments were introduced (the RFC Editor text is in Section 2, subsection d) in 1994. It was also described in RFC 2850, (again in Section 2 d) in 2000. All of the updates which relate to looking at the series as a set of streams are in the RFC model documents (RFC 5620 and RFC 6635) whose initial publication was in 2009 and update in 2012.
regards,
Ted Hardie
