Hi Sarah,
Thanks for posting this document for comment. My feedback is below. To be clear, I am reviewing this de novo, without regard to previous versions.
--Richard
=====
Overall, this document seems odd for an SOW. The point of an SOW is to state what the contractor must do in order to fulfill their end of the contract. This document contains a lot of text that irrelevant to that point, and is vague on the details of what is actually to be done. Going through the document in more detail...
> Contractor will also be required to attend three annual IETF meetings...
This seems overly specific. Would we find the RSE in breach of their contract if they had to miss an IETF meeting? Even if the answer is "it depends", this should be softened.
> CONTRACT PERIOD
This is irrelevant to the SOW. It should be specified elsewhere in the contract.
> REPORTING RELATIONSHIPS
If I were bidding on this, I would find this section terrifyingly vague. I would want to know at least:
* What are my obligations to the RSOC? Do I need to provide them reporting, or attend meetings, or....? Otherwise, they could tell the contracting organization that I'm non-compliant for any reason.
* What are my powers with regard to the RPC and RFC Publisher? I can't "manage" them if I don't have any control over them, and again, I don't want to be found in breach because I'm not doing something I wasn't empowered to do.
> Operational Oversight Areas
> Policy Development Areas
I don't have the time at the moment to comment on these in detail, but again, if I were bidding, I would be concerned about the vagueness here. How am I supposed to know if I'm, for example, "Ensuri[ing] the ongoing improvement rfc-editor.org" to sufficient degree? What does it mean to "serve as the primary representative of the RFC Series"?
> EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE REQUIRED
> SKILLS AND ABILITIES REQUIRED
These do not belong in the SOW, they belong in the RFP. Once the SOW enters into force, it doesn't matter what these sections say, since the selection will have been made. I also note that these are already in RFC 6635.
Thanks for posting this document for comment. My feedback is below. To be clear, I am reviewing this de novo, without regard to previous versions.
--Richard
=====
Overall, this document seems odd for an SOW. The point of an SOW is to state what the contractor must do in order to fulfill their end of the contract. This document contains a lot of text that irrelevant to that point, and is vague on the details of what is actually to be done. Going through the document in more detail...
> Contractor will also be required to attend three annual IETF meetings...
This seems overly specific. Would we find the RSE in breach of their contract if they had to miss an IETF meeting? Even if the answer is "it depends", this should be softened.
> CONTRACT PERIOD
This is irrelevant to the SOW. It should be specified elsewhere in the contract.
> REPORTING RELATIONSHIPS
If I were bidding on this, I would find this section terrifyingly vague. I would want to know at least:
* What are my obligations to the RSOC? Do I need to provide them reporting, or attend meetings, or....? Otherwise, they could tell the contracting organization that I'm non-compliant for any reason.
* What are my powers with regard to the RPC and RFC Publisher? I can't "manage" them if I don't have any control over them, and again, I don't want to be found in breach because I'm not doing something I wasn't empowered to do.
> Operational Oversight Areas
> Policy Development Areas
I don't have the time at the moment to comment on these in detail, but again, if I were bidding, I would be concerned about the vagueness here. How am I supposed to know if I'm, for example, "Ensuri[ing] the ongoing improvement rfc-editor.org" to sufficient degree? What does it mean to "serve as the primary representative of the RFC Series"?
> EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE REQUIRED
> SKILLS AND ABILITIES REQUIRED
These do not belong in the SOW, they belong in the RFP. Once the SOW enters into force, it doesn't matter what these sections say, since the selection will have been made. I also note that these are already in RFC 6635.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:26 AM Sarah B <sbanks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,
Attached is the RSE SOW intended for the upcoming RFP. You'll find it very much inline with the previous SOW we sent out as part of the RFP during the last iteration of this process. The RSOC is requesting community feedback, and would like to run a 4 week feedback period. That period starts today, July 15, and ends August 15, 2019. Please direct your feedback to the RSOC directly.
Kind regards,
Sarah Banks, Chair
on behalf of the RSOC
