Network Working Group O. Kolkman, Ed.
Request for Comments: 5620 IAB
Category: Informational August 2009
Network Working Group O. Kolkman, Ed.
Request for Comments: 5620 IAB
Category: Informational August 2009
RFC Editor Model (Version 1)
RFC编辑器模型（版本1）
Abstract
摘要
The RFC Editor performs a number of functions that may be carried out by various persons or entities. The RFC Editor model presented in this document divides the responsibilities for the RFC Series into four functions: The RFC Series Editor, the Independent Submission Editor, the RFC Production Center, and the RFC Publisher. It also introduces the RFC Series Advisory Group and an (optional) Independent Submission Stream Editorial Board. The model outlined here is intended to increase flexibility and operational support options, provide for the orderly succession of the RFC Editor, and ensure the continuity of the RFC series, while maintaining RFC quality and timely processing, ensuring document accessibility, reducing costs, and increasing cost transparency.
RFC编辑器执行许多功能，这些功能可能由各种人员或实体执行。本文档中介绍的RFC编辑器模型将RFC系列的职责划分为四个功能：RFC系列编辑器、独立提交编辑器、RFC生产中心和RFC发布者。它还介绍了RFC系列咨询小组和（可选）独立提交流编辑委员会。此处概述的模型旨在增加灵活性和操作支持选项，提供RFC编辑器的有序继承，并确保RFC系列的连续性，同时保持RFC质量和及时处理，确保文档可访问性，降低成本，并提高成本透明度。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本备忘录为互联网社区提供信息。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2009 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托在本文件出版之日生效的与IETF文件有关的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). 请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. IAOC Implementation .............................................4
2.1. Expenses for the RFC Editor ................................4
3. RFC Editor Model ................................................5
3.1. RFC Series Editor ..........................................6
3.2. Independent Submission Editor ..............................8
3.3. RFC Production Center ......................................9
3.4. RFC Publisher .............................................11
4. Committees .....................................................11
4.1. RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG) ..........................11
4.1.1. Charter ............................................11
4.1.2. Membership .........................................12
4.1.3. Disagreements among RFC Editor Entities ............13
4.2. Independent Submission Stream Editorial Board .............14
5. IANA Considerations ............................................14
6. Security Considerations ........................................14
7. Acknowledgments ................................................15
8. References .....................................................16
8.1. Normative References ......................................16
8.2. Informative References.....................................16
Appendix A. 2009 Selection Process ................................17
A.1. Ad Hoc Advisory Committee(s) ..............................17
A.2. The IAB Selection Process of an RFC Series Editor
and/or an Independent Submission Editor ...................17
A.2.1. Nominations and Eligibility ........................17
A.2.2. Committees in 2009 .................................18
A.2.3. Selection ..........................................18
A.2.4. Care of Personal Information........................18
A.2.5. Term of Office and Selection Time Frame ............19
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. IAOC Implementation .............................................4
2.1. Expenses for the RFC Editor ................................4
3. RFC Editor Model ................................................5
3.1. RFC Series Editor ..........................................6
3.2. Independent Submission Editor ..............................8
3.3. RFC Production Center ......................................9
3.4. RFC Publisher .............................................11
4. Committees .....................................................11
4.1. RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG) ..........................11
4.1.1. Charter ............................................11
4.1.2. Membership .........................................12
4.1.3. Disagreements among RFC Editor Entities ............13
4.2. Independent Submission Stream Editorial Board .............14
5. IANA Considerations ............................................14
6. Security Considerations ........................................14
7. Acknowledgments ................................................15
8. References .....................................................16
8.1. Normative References ......................................16
8.2. Informative References.....................................16
Appendix A. 2009 Selection Process ................................17
A.1. Ad Hoc Advisory Committee(s) ..............................17
A.2. The IAB Selection Process of an RFC Series Editor
and/or an Independent Submission Editor ...................17
A.2.1. Nominations and Eligibility ........................17
A.2.2. Committees in 2009 .................................18
A.2.3. Selection ..........................................18
A.2.4. Care of Personal Information........................18
A.2.5. Term of Office and Selection Time Frame ............19
The IAB, on behalf of the Internet technical community, is concerned with ensuring the continuity of the RFC Series, orderly RFC Editor succession, maintaining RFC quality, and RFC document accessibility. The IAB is also sensitive to the concerns of the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) about providing the necessary services in a cost-effective and efficient manner.
IAB代表互联网技术界，致力于确保RFC系列的连续性、有序的RFC编辑器继承、保持RFC质量和RFC文档的可访问性。IAB还对IETF行政监督委员会（IAOC）关于以成本效益和效率高的方式提供必要服务的关注非常敏感。
The definition of the RFC series is described in RFC 4844 [1]. Section 3.1 of RFC 4844 defines "RFC Editor":
RFC 4844[1]中描述了RFC系列的定义。RFC 4844第3.1节定义了“RFC编辑器”：
| 3.1. RFC Editor
|
| Originally, there was a single person acting as editor of the RFC
| Series (the RFC Editor). The task has grown, and the work now
| requires the organized activity of several experts, so there are RFC
| Editors, or an RFC Editor organization. In time, there may be
| multiple organizations working together to undertake the work
| required by the RFC Series. For simplicity's sake, and without
| attempting to predict how the role might be subdivided among them,
| this document refers to this collection of experts and organizations
| as the "RFC Editor".
|
| The RFC Editor is an expert technical editor and series editor,
| acting to support the mission of the RFC Series. As such, the RFC
| Editor is the implementer handling the editorial management of the
| RFC Series, in accordance with the defined processes. In addition,
| the RFC Editor is expected to be the expert and prime mover in
| discussions about policies for editing, publishing, and archiving
| RFCs.
| 3.1. RFC Editor
|
| Originally, there was a single person acting as editor of the RFC
| Series (the RFC Editor). The task has grown, and the work now
| requires the organized activity of several experts, so there are RFC
| Editors, or an RFC Editor organization. In time, there may be
| multiple organizations working together to undertake the work
| required by the RFC Series. For simplicity's sake, and without
| attempting to predict how the role might be subdivided among them,
| this document refers to this collection of experts and organizations
| as the "RFC Editor".
|
| The RFC Editor is an expert technical editor and series editor,
| acting to support the mission of the RFC Series. As such, the RFC
| Editor is the implementer handling the editorial management of the
| RFC Series, in accordance with the defined processes. In addition,
| the RFC Editor is expected to be the expert and prime mover in
| discussions about policies for editing, publishing, and archiving
| RFCs.
RFC 4844 makes no attempt to explore the internal organization of the RFC Editor. However, RFC 4844 envisions changes in the RFC Editor organizational structure. In discussion with the Internet community, the IAB considered changes that increase flexibility and operational support options, provide for the orderly succession of the RFC Editor, and ensure the continuity of the RFC series, while maintaining RFC quality and timely processing, ensuring document accessibility, reducing costs, and increasing cost transparency. The model set forth below is the result of those discussions, and examines the internal organization of the RFC Editor, while remaining consistent with RFC 4844.
RFC4844没有尝试探索RFC编辑器的内部组织。然而，RFC4844设想了RFC编辑器组织结构的变化。在与互联网社区的讨论中，IAB考虑了增加灵活性和操作支持选项的变化，为RFC编辑器的有序继任提供了条件，并确保RFC系列的连续性，同时保持RFC质量和及时处理，确保文档可访问性，降低成本，以及提高成本透明度。下面列出的模型是这些讨论的结果，它检查了RFC编辑器的内部组织，同时与RFC 4844保持一致。
Note that RFC 4844 uses the term "RFC Editor function" or "RFC Editor" as the collective set of responsibilities for which this memo provides a model for internal organization. This memo introduces the term "RFC Series Editor" or "Series Editor" for one of the organizational components.
请注意，RFC 4844使用术语“RFC编辑器功能”或“RFC编辑器”作为集体责任集，本备忘录为内部组织提供了一个模型。本备忘录介绍了其中一个组织组件的术语“RFC系列编辑器”或“系列编辑器”。
While the IAB approved the initial version of this RFC Editor model on October 1, 2008, the model has received clarifications since. It should be noted that the publication of the document as an RFC does not cast the model in stone, as the primary purpose of this document, throughout the publication process, is to encourage normal community review in order to ascertain consensus to work to this model as a first step. The document, and the resulting structures, will be modified as needed through normal procedures. The IAB will continue to monitor discussions within the community about potential adjustments to the RFC Editor model and recognizes that the process described in this document may need to be adjusted to align with any changes that result from such discussions, hence the version number in the title.
虽然IAB于2008年10月1日批准了该RFC编辑器模型的初始版本，但该模型自发布以来已得到澄清。应注意的是，将本文件作为RFC发布并不会使模型一成不变，因为在整个发布过程中，本文件的主要目的是鼓励正常的社区审查，以确定作为第一步使用该模型的共识。该文件以及由此产生的结构将根据需要通过正常程序进行修改。IAB将继续监控社区内关于RFC编辑器模型潜在调整的讨论，并认识到本文件中描述的流程可能需要调整，以与此类讨论产生的任何更改保持一致，因此标题中的版本号也会随之调整。
In particular, the document will be reviewed after the various transition periods and mechanisms specified in this version are completed.
特别是，本文件将在本版本规定的各种过渡期和机制完成后进行审查。
The model is constructed in such a way that it allows for all these functions to be implemented jointly or under separate contractual arrangements. In fact, a bidder could put together a proposal that includes one or more subcontractors. The reporting structure will depend on the manner that the contracts are awarded, and they are subject to change over time. As a result, the model describes only responsibilities, procedures, and process. The exact implementation is a responsibility of the IAOC.
该模型的构建方式允许所有这些功能共同实施或在单独的合同安排下实施。事实上，投标人可以提出一份包含一个或多个分包商的建议书。报告结构将取决于授予合同的方式，并可能随着时间的推移而发生变化。因此，该模型只描述了职责、程序和过程。IAOC负责具体实施。
The expenses discussed in this document are not new expenses. They are part of the IASA budget. Today, these expenses are part of the RFC Editor contract with the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute.
本文件中讨论的费用不是新的费用。它们是IASA预算的一部分。今天，这些费用是南加州大学信息科学研究所RFC编辑合同的一部分。
The RFC Editor model divides the responsibilities for the RFC Series into the following components:
RFC编辑器模型将RFC系列的职责划分为以下组件：
o RFC Series Editor ("RSE").
o RFC系列编辑器（“RSE”）。
o Independent Submission Editor ("ISE").
o 独立提交编辑器（“ISE”）。
o RFC Production Center.
o RFC生产中心。
o RFC Publisher.
o RFC出版商。
The RFC Series production and process under this structure is schematically represented by the figure below. (The figure does not depict oversight and escalation relations.)
该结构下的RFC系列生产和工艺如下图所示。（图中未描述监督和上报关系。）
------ ----- ------ ---------
Stream | | | | | | |Community|
Pro- | IETF | | IAB | | IRTF | | at |
ducers | | | | | | | Large |
--^--- --^-- ---^-- ----^----
| | | |
| | | | -------
| | | | | Indep.|
--v--- ---v--- ---v-- ----v------ | Stream|
Stream | | | | | | |Independent| | Edi- |
Appro- | IESG | | IAB | | IRSG | |Submission |.....| torial|
vers | | | | | | | Editor | | Board |
----^- ---^--- ----^--- ----^------ -------
| | | |
| | | | -------
| | | | | RFC |
------ --v--------v----------v-----------v----- | Series|
| | | | | Adv. |
| IANA | <->| RFC Production Center <---. | Group |
| | | | | -------
------ -----------------^---------------------- | |
| | |
| ------v-------
------v--------- | |
| | | RFC Series |
| RFC Publisher |<------->| Editor |
| | | |
---------------- --------------
------ ----- ------ ---------
Stream | | | | | | |Community|
Pro- | IETF | | IAB | | IRTF | | at |
ducers | | | | | | | Large |
--^--- --^-- ---^-- ----^----
| | | |
| | | | -------
| | | | | Indep.|
--v--- ---v--- ---v-- ----v------ | Stream|
Stream | | | | | | |Independent| | Edi- |
Appro- | IESG | | IAB | | IRSG | |Submission |.....| torial|
vers | | | | | | | Editor | | Board |
----^- ---^--- ----^--- ----^------ -------
| | | |
| | | | -------
| | | | | RFC |
------ --v--------v----------v-----------v----- | Series|
| | | | | Adv. |
| IANA | <->| RFC Production Center <---. | Group |
| | | | | -------
------ -----------------^---------------------- | |
| | |
| ------v-------
------v--------- | |
| | | RFC Series |
| RFC Publisher |<------->| Editor |
| | | |
---------------- --------------
Figure 1: Ordinary RFC Series production and process
图1：普通RFC系列产品和工艺
In this model, documents are produced and approved through multiple document streams. The four that now exist are described in [1]. Documents from these streams are edited and processed by the Production Center and published by the Publisher. The RFC Series Editor will exercise executive-level management over many of the activities of the RFC Publisher and the RFC Production Center (which can be seen as back-office functions) and will be the entity that:
在此模型中，通过多个文档流生成和批准文档。[1]中描述了目前存在的四种情况。这些流中的文档由生产中心编辑和处理，并由发布者发布。RFC系列编辑器将对RFC发行商和RFC生产中心的许多活动（可被视为后台职能）实施执行级管理，并将成为以下实体：
o Faces the community.
o 面向社区。
o Works with the IAOC for contractual responsibilities.
o 与IAOC合作承担合同责任。
o In collaboration with the RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG), identifies and leads community discussion of important issues and opportunities facing the RFC Series.
o 与RFC系列咨询小组（RSAG）合作，确定并领导社区讨论RFC系列面临的重要问题和机遇。
while the IAB and IAOC maintain their chartered responsibility. More details about the collaboration with the RSAG and the IAB responsibilities can be found in Section 4.1.
IAB和IAOC保留其特许责任。关于与RSAG的合作和IAB职责的更多详细信息，请参见第4.1节。
The RSE does not have the authority to hire or fire RFC Editor contractors or personnel (see Section 4.1.3).
RSE无权雇佣或解雇RFC编辑承包商或人员（见第4.1.3节）。
The RFC Series Editor is an individual who may have assistants and who will regularly be provided support from an advisory group (see Section 4.1). The RSE is responsible for:
RFC系列编辑是一名可能有助手的个人，他将定期得到咨询小组的支持（见第4.1节）。RSE负责：
1. Identifying appropriate steps for RFC Series continuity;
1. 确定RFC系列连续性的适当步骤；
2. Exercising executive-level management over the implementation of policies, processes, and procedures established to ensure the quality and consistency for the RFC Series. The RFC Series Editor will work with the RSAG, and, where appropriate, the IAB and IAOC to develop new policy and see that contractual agreements are met;
2. 对为确保RFC系列的质量和一致性而制定的政策、流程和程序的实施进行执行级管理。RFC系列编辑将与RSAG合作，并在适当情况下与IAB和IAOC合作，以制定新政策，确保符合合同协议；
3. Taking proposed changes to the community, and working with the IAB so that the IAB can ensure that there is sufficient community review before significant policies or policy changes are adopted;
3. 向社区提出建议的变更，并与IAB合作，以便IAB能够确保在采取重大政策或政策变更之前进行充分的社区审查；
4. Coordinating with the IAB and/or IAOC and, together with the IAB and/or IAOC, participating in reviews of the RFC Publisher, RFC Production Center, and Independent Submission Editor functions to ensure the above-mentioned continuity;
4. 与IAB和/或IAOC协调，并与IAB和/或IAOC一起参与对RFC出版商、RFC制作中心和独立提交编辑职能的审查，以确保上述连续性；
5. Developing, maintaining, and publishing the RFC Style Manual for use by authors, editors, the stream managers, the RFC Production Center, and the RFC Publisher;
5. 开发、维护和发布RFC风格手册，供作者、编辑、流管理者、RFC生产中心和RFC出版商使用；
6. Managing the RFC errata process;
6. 管理RFC勘误表流程；
7. Liaising with the IAB;
7. 与IAB联络；
8. Overseeing consistency of RFCs with the RFC Series and RFC Style Manual.
8. 监督RFC与RFC系列和RFC风格手册的一致性。
There are many potential issues with respect to RFC Series continuity. To name a few: look and feel of the series, indexing methodologies, accessibility of the publications, IPR and copyright issues, and formatting issues. After identifying the appropriate steps to address such issues, the implementation of those steps resides mostly with the RFC production and publishing functions. Since the IAOC maintains oversight of the implementation, the RFC Series Editor is expected to be invited and to participate in reviews of that implementation.
关于RFC系列的连续性，存在许多潜在问题。举几个例子：本系列的外观、索引方法、出版物的可访问性、知识产权和版权问题以及格式问题。在确定了解决这些问题的适当步骤之后，这些步骤的实现主要由RFC生产和发布功能完成。由于IAOC对实施情况进行监督，预计将邀请RFC系列编辑并参与对该实施情况的审查。
The RFC Series Editor is a senior technology professional with the following qualifications:
RFC系列编辑是具有以下资格的高级技术专业人员：
1. Strong understanding of the IETF and RFC process.
1. 对IETF和RFC流程有很强的理解。
2. Executive management experience suitable to managing the requirements outlined elsewhere in this document and the many aspects of this role, and to coordinating the overall RFC Editor process.
2. 执行管理经验，适用于管理本文件其他部分概述的要求和该角色的许多方面，以及协调整个RFC编辑流程。
3. Good understanding of the English language and technical terminology related to the Internet.
3. 对互联网相关的英语和技术术语有良好的理解。
4. Good communication skills.
4. 良好的沟通技巧。
5. Experience with editorial processes.
5. 有编辑经验。
6. Independent worker.
6. 独立工作者。
7. Experience as an RFC author desired.
7. 有RFC作者经验者优先。
There are alternative selection methods for selecting the individual to serve as the RFC Series Editor:
有其他选择方法可用于选择作为RFC系列编辑器的个人：
The first alternative involves a Request for Proposal (RFP) process run by the IAOC. The IAOC would seek a person with the listed qualifications in a broadly distributed RFP. The winner would be
第一个备选方案涉及由IAOC运行的征求建议书（RFP）流程。IAOC将在广泛分发的RFP中寻找具有所列资格的人员。获胜者将是
selected by the IAOC in consultation with the IAB, and then, the IAOC would contract for the services. Contract terms, including length of contract, extensions, and renewals, shall be as provided in the RFP. The opportunity to bid shall be broadly available. Fees and expenses to support the administrative operation of the RFC Series Editor would be part of the awarded contract and be part of the IASA budget.
由IAOC与IAB协商选定，然后，IAOC将签订服务合同。合同条款，包括合同期限、延期和续签，应符合RFP的规定。投标机会应广泛可用。支持RFC系列编辑的行政运作的费用和开支将是授予合同的一部分，也是IASA预算的一部分。
The second alternative involves a nomination and confirmation process. Candidates are nominated, and then an individual with the listed qualifications is selected by the Internet community and confirmed by the IAB. An approach similar to the one used by the IAB to select an IAOC member every other year (as described in Appendix A) will be used. Once the selection is made, a contract will be negotiated between the person selected and the IAOC, following the general model above. Financial compensation and expenses to support the administrative operation of the RFC Series Editor selected in this manner would be part of the IASA budget.
第二种选择涉及提名和确认过程。候选人被提名，然后互联网社区选择具有所列资格的个人，并由IAB确认。将采用类似于IAB每隔一年选择IAOC成员的方法（如附录A所述）。一旦做出选择，将按照上述一般模式，在被选人员和IAOC之间协商合同。支持以这种方式选定的RFC系列编辑的行政运作的财务补偿和费用将成为IASA预算的一部分。
Based on an Request for Information (RFI) issued by the IAOC in December 2008, the IAOC recommended that the second alternative is chosen for the selection cycle to be completed in 2009.
根据审咨委2008年12月发布的信息请求书（RFI），审咨委建议在2009年完成的甄选周期中选择第二个备选方案。
The Independent Submission Editor is an individual who may have assistants and who is responsible for:
独立提交编辑是可能有助手的个人，负责：
1. Maintaining technical quality of the Independent Submission stream.
1. 维护独立提交流的技术质量。
2. Reviewing, approving, and processing Independent Submissions.
2. 审查、批准和处理独立提交的文件。
3. Forwarding to the Production Center the Internet-Drafts that have been accepted for publication as RFCs in the Independent Submission Stream.
3. 将已接受作为独立提交流中的RFC发布的Internet草稿转发给生产中心。
4. Reviewing and approving RFC errata in Independent Submissions.
4. 审查和批准独立提交的RFC勘误表。
5. Coordinating work and conforming to general RFC Series policies as specified by the IAB and RSE.
5. 协调工作并遵守IAB和RSE规定的一般RFC系列政策。
6. Providing statistics and documentation as requested by the RSE and/or IAOC.
6. 按照RSE和/或IAOC的要求提供统计数据和文件。
The Independent Submission Editor is a senior position for which the following qualifications are desired:
独立提交编辑是一个高级职位，需要具备以下资格：
1. Technical competence, i.e., broad technical experience and perspective across the whole range of Internet technologies and applications, and specifically, the ability to work effectively with portions of that spectrum in which no personal expertise exists.
1. 技术能力，即在互联网技术和应用的整个范围内拥有广泛的技术经验和观点，特别是在没有个人专业知识的范围内有效工作的能力。
2. Thorough familiarity with the RFC series.
2. 完全熟悉RFC系列。
3. An ability to define and constitute advisory and document review arrangements. If those arrangements include an Editorial Board similar to the current one or some equivalent arrangement, assess the technical competence of potential Editorial Board members.
3. 能够定义和制定咨询和文件审查安排。如果这些安排包括一个与当前类似的编辑委员会或一些同等安排，则评估潜在编辑委员会成员的技术能力。
4. Good standing in the technical community, in and beyond the IETF.
4. 在IETF内外的技术界有良好的声誉。
5. Demonstrated editorial skills, good command of the English language, and demonstrated history of being able to work effectively with technical documents and materials created by others.
5. 具备编辑技能，良好的英语能力，能够有效处理他人编写的技术文档和材料。
6. The ability to work effectively in a multi-actor environment with divided authority and responsibility similar to that described in this document.
6. 在多参与者环境中有效工作的能力，具有类似于本文件所述的权力和责任划分。
The Independent Submission Editor may seek support from an advisory board (see Section 4.2) and may form a team to perform the activities needed to fulfill their responsibilities.
独立提交编辑可寻求咨询委员会的支持（见第4.2节），并可组建团队，开展履行职责所需的活动。
The individual with the listed qualifications will be selected by the IAB after input is collected from the community. An approach similar to the one used by the IAB to select an IAOC member every other year (as described in Appendix A) should be used. While the ISE itself is considered a volunteer function, the IAB considers maintaining the Independent Submission stream within the RFC Series part of the IAB's supported activities, and will include the expenses made for the support of the ISE in its IASA-supported budget.
IAB将在从社区收集信息后选择具备所列资格的个人。应采用类似于IAB每隔一年选择IAOC成员的方法（如附录A所述）。虽然ISE本身被视为一项志愿者职能，但IAB考虑在RFC系列中维护独立提交流，这是IAB支持活动的一部分，并将ISE支持费用纳入其IASA支持的预算中。
RFC Production is performed by a paid contractor, and the contractor responsibilities include:
RFC生产由付费承包商进行，承包商的责任包括：
1. Editing inputs from all RFC streams to comply with the RFC Style Manual;
1. 编辑所有RFC流的输入，以符合RFC样式手册；
2. Creating records of edits performed on documents;
2. 创建对文档进行编辑的记录；
3. Identifying where editorial changes might have technical impact and seeking necessary clarification;
3. 确定编辑变更可能产生技术影响的地方，并寻求必要的澄清；
4. Engaging in dialogue with authors, document shepherds, IANA, and/or stream-dependent contacts when clarification is needed;
4. 当需要澄清时，与作者、文件管理员、IANA和/或依赖流的联系人进行对话；
5. Creating records of dialogue with document authors;
5. 创建与文件作者的对话记录；
6. Requesting advice from the RFC Series Editor as needed;
6. 根据需要向RFC系列编辑征求建议；
7. Providing suggestions to the RFC Series Editor as needed;
7. 根据需要向RFC系列编辑提供建议；
8. Coordinating with IANA to perform protocol parameter registry actions;
8. 与IANA协调执行协议参数注册操作；
9. Assigning RFC numbers;
9. 分配RFC编号；
10. Establishing publication readiness of each document through communication with the authors, document shepherds, IANA and/or stream-dependent contacts, and, if needed, with the RFC Series Editor;
10. 通过与作者、文件管理员、IANA和/或流相关联系人以及RFC系列编辑器（如需要）的沟通，确定各文件的出版准备情况；
11. Forwarding ready-to-publish documents to the RFC Publisher;
11. 将准备发布的文档转发给RFC发布者；
12. Forwarding records of edits and author dialogue to the RFC Publisher so these can be preserved;
12. 将编辑记录和作者对话转发给RFC出版商，以便保存这些记录；
13. Liaising with IESG and IAB.
13. 与IESG和IAB联络。
The RFC Production Center contractor is to be selected by the IAOC through an RFP process. The IAOC will seek a bidder who, among other things, is able to provide a professional, quality, timely, and cost-effective service against the established style and production guidelines. Contract terms, including length of contract, extensions and renewals, shall be as defined in an RFP. The opportunity to bid shall be broadly available.
IAOC将通过RFP流程选择RFC生产中心承包商。IAOC将寻找一位能够提供专业、优质、及时和经济高效的服务的投标人，以符合既定的风格和生产指南。合同条款，包括合同期限、延期和续签，应在RFP中定义。投标机会应广泛可用。
As described in Section 3.1, this model allows the IAOC to recommend the RSE position to be selected through an RFP process. In that case, the model also allows combining the RFC Production Center bid with the RSE bid. For 2009, the recommendation was made that the RSE is selected through an IAB-led selection process.
如第3.1节所述，该模型允许IAOC建议通过RFP流程选择RSE职位。在这种情况下，该模型还允许将RFC生产中心投标与RSE投标相结合。2009年，建议通过IAB领导的选择流程选择RSE。
The RFC Publisher responsibilities include:
RFC发布者的职责包括：
1. Announcing and providing on-line access to RFCs.
1. 宣布并提供对RFC的在线访问。
2. Providing on-line system to submit RFC Errata.
2. 提供在线系统以提交RFC勘误表。
3. Providing on-line access to approved RFC Errata.
3. 提供对经批准的RFC勘误表的在线访问。
4. Providing backups.
4. 提供备份。
5. Providing storage and preservation of records.
5. 提供记录的存储和保存。
6. Authenticating RFCs for legal proceedings.
6. 为法律程序认证RFC。
All these activities will be done under general supervision of the RSE and need some level of coordination with various submission streams and the RSE.
所有这些活动都将在RSE的总体监督下进行，并且需要与各种提交流和RSE进行一定程度的协调。
Implementation of the RFC Publisher function can be pursued in two different ways. The choice between these alternatives will be based on an RFI issued by the IAOC in January 2009.
RFC发布者功能的实现可以通过两种不同的方式进行。这些备选方案之间的选择将基于2009年1月IAOC发布的RFI。
The first alternative is to modify the IETF Secretariat contract to include these services. Expenses to support these services would be part of the revised contract.
第一种选择是修改IETF秘书处合同，以包括这些服务。支持这些服务的费用将成为修订合同的一部分。
The second alternative is a separate vendor selected by the IAOC through an RFP process, possibly as part of the same contract as the RFC Series Editor. Expenses to support these services would be part of the awarded contract.
第二个备选方案是IAOC通过RFP流程选择的独立供应商，可能作为RFC系列编辑器合同的一部分。支持这些服务的费用将成为中标合同的一部分。
The purpose of the RSAG is to provide expert, informed guidance (chiefly, to the RSE) in matters affecting the RFC Series operation and development. Such matters include, but are not limited to, issues in operation of the RFC model components, and consideration of additional RFC streams, to give a sense of the range of topics covered.
RSAG的目的是就影响RFC系列运营和开发的事项提供专家、知情的指导（主要是向RSE）。这些事项包括但不限于RFC模型组件运行中的问题，以及额外RFC流的考虑，以了解所涵盖的主题范围。
The RSAG is chartered by the IAB. As such, it operates independently of the IAB to fulfill that charter, and provides periodic reports to the IAB via the RSE.
RSAG由IAB特许经营。因此，它独立于IAB运作，以履行该章程，并通过RSE向IAB提供定期报告。
The group provides guidance to the RSE, who in turn addresses immediate operational issues or opportunities with the ISE, Production Center, or Publisher. In cases where these issues have contractual side-effects, the RSE provides guidance to the IETF Administrative Director (IAD). The RSAG also serves to provide advice to the RSE on longer-term, larger-scale developments for the RFC Series. This informs the proposals the RSE takes to the community for discussion, and the IAD/IAOC as proposals for implementation.
该小组向RSE提供指导，RSE反过来解决ISE、生产中心或发行商的即时运营问题或机会。如果这些问题具有合同副作用，RSE将向IETF行政总监（IAD）提供指导。RSAG还就RFC系列的长期、大规模开发向RSE提供建议。这将通知RSE提交给社区讨论的建议，以及IAD/IAOC作为实施建议的建议。
The RSAG will assist the RSE in identifying and leading community discussion of important issues and opportunities facing the RFC Series. The IAB retains its oversight role and is responsible for ensuring that adequate community discussion has been held on any such significant topics.
RSAG将协助RSE确定并领导社区讨论RFC系列面临的重要问题和机遇。IAB保留其监督作用，并负责确保就任何此类重要主题进行充分的社区讨论。
The RSAG full members are all at-large members, selected for their experience and interest in the RFC Series, to provide consistency and constancy of the RFC Series interpretation over time; the members do not represent a particular RFC stream or any organizations. In particular, there is no requirement or expectation that RSAG members will be IAB members. The RSAG members are proposed by the Series Editor in consultation with the sitting RSAG members, and then confirmed and formally appointed by the IAB. In addition to these full members, each RFC stream approver will appoint a liaison to the RSAG to provide context specific to their stream. The liaisons do not have to be members of the stream approval bodies. Initially, there will be no IAOC or IAB liaison for their oversight role; however, as experience is gained, the IAOC, IAB, or RSAG may request such liaisons.
RSAG正式成员均为普通成员，根据其在RFC系列中的经验和兴趣进行选择，以提供随时间变化的RFC系列解释的一致性和稳定性；成员不代表特定的RFC流或任何组织。特别是，没有要求或期望RSAG成员成为IAB成员。RSAG成员由丛书编辑与在任RSAG成员协商后提出，然后由IAB确认并正式任命。除了这些正式成员外，每个RFC流审批人将指定一名联络人与RSAG联络，以提供其流的特定上下文。联络人不必是河流审批机构的成员。最初，不会有IAOC或IAB联络，以履行其监督职责；但是，随着经验的积累，IAOC、IAB或RSAG可能会要求进行此类联络。
The RSAG does not select or appoint the RSE, or any other component of the RFC Editor model, although it acts as an important resource for informing any selection process.
RSAG不选择或指定RSE或RFC编辑器模型的任何其他组件，尽管它是通知任何选择过程的重要资源。
It is envisioned that the RSAG will be composed of appointed full members serving staggered 3 year terms, plus the RSE. The full members will serve at the pleasure of the IAB -- appointed by the IAB, and if necessary, removed by the IAB.
预计RSAG将由任命的正式成员组成，成员任期为3年，交错任期，再加上RSE。正式成员将根据IAB的意愿任职——由IAB任命，必要时由IAB罢免。
In order to provide continuity and to assist with a smooth transition of the RFC Editor function, the members of the existing RFC Editor Editorial Board who are willing to do so are asked to serve as an interim RSAG, effective as of the time of approval of this document. Within one year from the time the RFC Editor function transitions to the new model and after consideration of the operation of the new model in practice, the interim RSAG and RSE will formulate recommendations to the IAB about this model, regarding the regular composition, size, and selection process for the permanent RSAG in particular.
为了提供连续性并协助RFC编辑职能的顺利过渡，要求愿意这样做的现有RFC编辑委员会成员担任临时RSAG，自本文件批准之日起生效。在RFC编辑器功能过渡到新模型后的一年内，在考虑新模型的实际运行后，临时RSAG和RSE将向IAB提出关于该模型的建议，特别是关于永久RSAG的常规组成、规模和选择过程。
If during the execution of their activities, a disagreement arises over an implementation decision made by one of the entities in the model, any relevant party should first request a review and reconsideration of the decision. If that party still disagrees after the reconsideration, that party may ask the RSE to decide or, especially if the RSE is involved, that party may ask the IAB Chair (for a technical or procedural matter) or IAD (for an administrative or contractual one) to mediate or appoint a mediator to aid in the discussions, although neither is obligated to do so. All parties should work informally and in good faith to reach a mutually agreeable conclusion.
如果在执行其活动期间，对示范中某一实体作出的执行决定产生分歧，任何相关方应首先请求对该决定进行审查和重新审议。如果该方在复议后仍不同意，则该方可要求RSE作出决定，尤其是如果涉及RSE，该方可要求IAB主席（技术或程序事项）或IAD（行政或合同事项）进行调解或指定调解人协助讨论，尽管双方都没有义务这样做。各方应非正式地、真诚地开展工作，以达成双方都同意的结论。
If such a conclusion is not possible through those informal processes, then the matter must be registered with the RFC Series Advisory Group. The RSAG may choose to offer advice to the RSE or more general advice to the parties involved and may ask the RSE to defer a decision until it formulates its advice. However, if a timely decision cannot be reached through discussion, mediation, and mutual agreement, the Series Editor is expected to make whatever decisions are needed to ensure the smooth functioning of the RFC Editor function; those decisions are final.
如果通过这些非正式程序无法得出这样的结论，则必须向RFC系列咨询小组登记该事项。RSAG可选择向RSE提供建议或向相关方提供更一般性的建议，并可要求RSE推迟做出决定，直到其制定建议。但是，如果无法通过讨论、调解和相互协商达成及时决定，则系列编辑应做出任何必要的决定，以确保RFC编辑功能的顺利运行；这些决定是最终决定。
RSE decisions of this type are limited to the functioning of the process and evaluation of whether current policies are appropriately implemented in the decision or need adjustment. In particular, it should be noted that final decisions about the technical content of individual documents are the exclusive responsibility of the stream approvers for those documents, as shown in the illustration in Figure 1.
此类RSE决策仅限于流程的运作和评估当前政策是否在决策中得到适当实施或需要调整。特别值得注意的是，关于单个文档的技术内容的最终决定是这些文档的流审批人的专属责任，如图1所示。
If a disagreement or decision has immediate or future contractual consequences, the Series Editor must identify the issue to the IAOC and, if the RSAG has provided advice, forward that advice as well.
如果意见分歧或决定具有即时或未来的合同后果，则丛书编辑必须向IAOC确认该问题，如果RSAG提供了建议，则还应转发该建议。
After the IAOC has notified the IAB, the IAD as guided by the IAOC, with advice provided by the Series Editor, has the responsibility to resolve these contractual issues.
IAOC通知IAB后，IAD在IAOC的指导下，在系列编辑的建议下，有责任解决这些合同问题。
If informal agreements cannot be reached and formal RSAG review and/or RSE or stream approver decisions are required, the RSE must identify the issues involved to the community and report them to the IAB in its oversight capacity. The RSE and IAB shall mutually develop a satisfactory mechanism for this type of reporting when and if it is necessary.
如果无法达成非正式协议，并且需要正式的RSAG审查和/或RSE或流审批人决定，则RSE必须向社区确定涉及的问题，并以其监督能力向IAB报告。RSE和IAB应在必要时共同为此类报告制定令人满意的机制。
IAB and community discussion of any patterns of disputes are expected to inform future changes to Series policies including possible updates to this document.
IAB和社区对任何争议模式的讨论预计将通知未来系列政策的变化，包括本文件的可能更新。
Today the RFC Editor is supported by an Editorial Board for the review of Independent Submission stream documents. This board is expected to evolve in what we will call the Independent Submission Stream Editorial Board. This volunteer Editorial Board will exist at the pleasure of the ISE, and the members serve at the pleasure of the ISE. The existence of this board is simply noted within this model, and additional discussion of such is considered out of scope of this document.
如今，RFC编辑器得到编辑委员会的支持，以审查独立提交流文件。该委员会预计将演变为我们称之为独立提交流编辑委员会。该志愿编辑委员会将根据ISE的意愿而存在，其成员将根据ISE的意愿而服务。本模型中仅说明了该委员会的存在，对该委员会的额外讨论不在本文件范围内。
This document defines several functions within the overall RFC Editor structure, and it places the responsibility for coordination of registry value assignments with the RFC Production Center. The IAOC will facilitate the establishment of the relationship between the RFC Production Center and IANA.
本文档在整个RFC编辑器结构中定义了几个功能，并负责与RFC生产中心协调注册表值分配。IAOC将促进RFC生产中心与IANA之间建立关系。
This document does not create a new registry nor does it register any values in existing registries, and no IANA action is required.
本文档不创建新注册表，也不在现有注册表中注册任何值，并且不需要IANA操作。
The same security considerations as those in RFC 4844 apply. The processes for the publication of documents must prevent the introduction of unapproved changes. Since the RFC Editor maintains the index of publications, sufficient security must be in place to prevent these published documents from being changed by external parties. The archive of RFC documents, any source documents needed to recreate the RFC documents, and any associated original documents
与RFC 4844中的安全注意事项相同。文件发布流程必须防止引入未经批准的更改。由于RFC编辑器维护出版物的索引，因此必须有足够的安全性，以防止外部各方更改这些已发布的文档。RFC文档的存档、重新创建RFC文档所需的任何源文档以及任何相关的原始文档
(such as lists of errata, tools, and, for some early items, non-machine-readable originals) need to be secured against failure of the storage medium and other similar disasters.
（例如勘误表、工具列表，以及一些早期项目的非机器可读原件）需要确保存储介质不会发生故障和其他类似灾难。
The IAOC should take these security considerations into account during the implementation of this RFC Editor model.
IAOC在实施此RFC编辑器模型时应考虑这些安全因素。
The RFC Editor model was conceived and discussed in hallways and on mail lists. The first iteration of the text on which this document is based was drafted by Leslie Daigle, Russ Housley, and Ray Pelletier. In addition to the members of the IAOC and IAB in conjunction with those roles, major and minor contributions were made by (in alphabetical order): Bob Braden, Brian Carpenter, Sandy Ginoza, Alice Hagens, Joel M. Halpern, Alfred Hoenes, Paul Hoffman, John Klensin, Subramanian Moonesamy, and Jim Schaad.
RFC编辑器模型是在走廊和邮件列表中构思和讨论的。本文件所依据文本的第一次迭代由Leslie Daigle、Russ Housley和Ray Pelletier起草。除了IAOC和IAB的成员以及这些角色外，主要和次要贡献由以下人员（按字母顺序排列）：鲍勃·布拉登、布赖恩·卡彭特、桑迪·吉诺萨、爱丽丝·哈根斯、乔尔·M·哈尔伯恩、阿尔弗雷德·霍恩斯、保罗·霍夫曼、约翰·克莱辛、Subramanian Moonesamy和吉姆·沙德。
The IAOC members at the time the RFC Editor model was approved were (in alphabetical order): Fred Baker, Bob Hinden, Russ Housley, Ole Jacobsen, Ed Juskevicius, Olaf Kolkman, Ray Pelletier (non-voting), Lynn St. Amour, and Jonne Soininen. In addition, Marshall Eubanks was serving as the IAOC Scribe.
在RFC编辑模式获得批准时，IAOC成员是（按字母顺序排列）：弗雷德·贝克、鲍勃·欣登、罗斯·霍斯利、奥勒·雅各布森、埃德·朱斯基维奇乌斯、奥拉夫·科尔克曼、雷·佩莱蒂埃（无投票权）、林恩·圣·阿莫尔和乔恩·索伊宁。此外，Marshall Eubanks担任IAOC书记员。
The IAB members at the time the initial RFC Editor model was approved were (in alphabetical order): Loa Andersson, Gonzalo Camarillo, Stuart Cheshire, Russ Housley, Olaf Kolkman, Gregory Lebovitz, Barry Leiba, Kurtis Lindqvist, Andrew Malis, Danny McPherson, David Oran, Dave Thaler, and Lixia Zhang. In addition, the IAB included two ex-officio members: Dow Street, who was serving as the IAB Executive Director, and Aaron Falk, who was serving as the IRTF Chair.
在最初的RFC编辑模式获得批准时，IAB的成员是（按字母顺序排列）：Loa Andersson、Gonzalo Camarillo、Stuart Cheshire、Russ Housley、Olaf Kolkman、Gregory Lebovitz、Barry Leiba、Kurtis Lindqvist、Andrew Malis、Danny McPherson、David Oran、Dave Thaler和Lixia Zhang。此外，IAB还包括两名当然成员：担任IAB执行董事的陶氏街和担任IRTF主席的亚伦·福克。
The IAB members at the time the this RFC was approved were (in alphabetical order): Marcelo Bagnulo, Gonzalo Camarillo, Stuart Cheshire, Vijay Gill, Russ Housley, John Klensin, Olaf Kolkman, Gregory Lebovitz, Andrew Malis, Danny McPherson, David Oran, Jon Peterson, and Dave Thaler.
本RFC批准时的IAB成员（按字母顺序排列）：马塞洛·巴格努洛、冈萨洛·卡马里洛、斯图尔特·切希尔、维杰·吉尔、罗斯·霍斯利、约翰·克莱辛、奥拉夫·科尔克曼、格雷戈里·勒博维茨、安德鲁·马利斯、丹尼·麦克弗森、大卫·奥兰、乔恩·彼得森和戴夫·泰勒。
[1] Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007.
[1] Daigle，L.和互联网架构委员会，“RFC系列和RFC编辑器”，RFC4842007年7月。
[2] Huston, G. and B. Wijnen, "The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) Member Selection Guidelines and Process", BCP 113, RFC 4333, December 2005.
[2] Huston，G.和B.Wijnen，“IETF行政监督委员会（IAOC）成员选择指南和流程”，BCP 113，RFC 4333，2005年12月。
In 2009, the IAB is responsible for the selection of the RFC Series Editor and for the selection of the Independent Submission Editor. The IAOC selects the RFC Production Center and the RFC Publisher from vendors that choose to submit a proposal. The IAOC procurement process is not described in this document.
2009年，IAB负责选择RFC系列编辑器和独立提交编辑器。IAOC从选择提交建议书的供应商中选择RFC生产中心和RFC发布者。本文件未描述IAOC采购流程。
The selection process for the ISE and RSE is taken from [2] but modified to allow for subject-matter experts to advise the IAB, to take into account that the community with interest in the RFC series extends beyond the IETF community.
ISE和RSE的选择过程取自[2]，但进行了修改，以允许主题专家向IAB提供建议，并考虑到对RFC系列感兴趣的社区超出了IETF社区。
It is expected that the IAB and IAOC will, during the various stages of the bidding process, establish one or more ad hoc advisory committees to assist them in the selection of the various functions. The names of the members of the committees, who do not need to be IAB members or IETF participants, will be made public through the IAB and IAOC minutes and possibly other mechanisms as well.
预计IAB和IAOC将在投标过程的各个阶段设立一个或多个特设咨询委员会，以协助他们选择各种职能。委员会成员的姓名（不需要是IAB成员或IETF参与者）将通过IAB和IAOC会议记录以及可能的其他机制公开。
Members of these committees are expected to have an understanding of the RFC series and related processes, and of procedures and interests of the various streams.
这些委员会的成员应了解RFC系列和相关流程，以及各种流程的程序和利益。
Members of the subcommittees will be privy to confidential material and are expected to honor confidentiality. Because they are subject to confidential material, they are recused from bidding on any of the functions for which financial compensation is offered.
小组委员会成员将对机密材料保密，并应遵守保密原则。由于他们受保密材料的约束，因此他们不会参与任何提供经济补偿的职能的投标。
The IAB and IAOC bear the responsibility for the selections of the candidates for defined functions. The committees provide advice and recommendations but are not expected to act as nomination or selection committees.
IAB和IAOC负责为定义的功能选择候选功能。这些委员会提供咨询和建议，但不应充当提名或推选委员会。
A.2. The IAB Selection Process of an RFC Series Editor and/or an Independent Submission Editor
A.2. RFC系列编辑器和/或独立提交编辑器的IAB选择过程
The IAB will be making a broad public call for nominations. The public call will specify the manner by which nominations will be accepted and the means by which the list of nominees will be published. Self-nominations are permitted. Along with the name and contact information for each candidate, details about the candidate's background and qualifications for the position should be attached to the nomination.
国际律师协会将广泛公开提名候选人。公众电话将说明接受提名的方式以及公布提名名单的方式。允许自我提名。提名书应附上候选人的姓名和联系方式以及候选人的背景和任职资格的详细信息。
People that served on the ad-hoc advisory committee(s) mentioned above are not eligible. There are no further limitations. Specifically, nominees do not have to be actively contributing to the IETF and active participation as a working group chair, an IETF Nominating Committee member, or an IAB or IESG member is not a limitation.
在上述特设咨询委员会任职的人员不符合资格。没有进一步的限制。具体而言，被提名人不必积极参与IETF，作为工作组主席、IETF提名委员会成员或IAB或IESG成员积极参与也不构成限制。
IAB members who accept a nomination for an IAB-selected position will recuse themselves from IAB selection discussions.
接受IAB选定职位提名的IAB成员将退出IAB选择讨论。
During the 2009 selection process, a committee assisted the IAOC/IAB in creating the job descriptions and statements of work. This committee may also assist in assessing the bids made to the IAOC for the Production Center and the RFC Publisher. Another committee, the Ad Hoc Committee for Selection of Editorial Functions, assists the IAB in the assessment of the RFC Series Editor and the Independent Submission Editor candidates.
在2009年甄选过程中，一个委员会协助IAOC/IAB编制了工作说明和工作说明书。该委员会还可协助评估向IAOC提交的制作中心和RFC出版商的投标书。另一个委员会，即编辑职能选择特设委员会，协助IAB评估RFC系列编辑和独立提交编辑候选人。
The IAB will publish the list of nominated persons prior to making a decision, allowing time for the community to pass any relevant comments to the IAB. When established, the advisory committee will be asked to provide a motivated shortlist. The IAB will review the nomination material, any submitted comments, the shortlist from the advisory committee, and make its selection.
IAB将在做出决定之前公布提名人名单，让社区有时间向IAB传达任何相关意见。咨询委员会成立后，将被要求提供一份积极的候选名单。IAB将审查提名材料、任何提交的评论、咨询委员会的入围名单，并做出选择。
It is noted that the community mentioned above is the community with an interest in RFCs and the RFC Editor's functioning; the IETF community is only a part of that community.
值得注意的是，上述社区是对RFC和RFC编辑功能感兴趣的社区；IETF社区只是该社区的一部分。
The main intent is to select the superior candidate, taking the continuity of the series into account.
主要目的是在考虑到系列的连续性的情况下，选择更优秀的候选人。
The following procedures will be used by the IAB in managing candidates' personal information:
IAB将使用以下程序管理候选人的个人信息：
o The candidate's name will be published, with all other candidate names, at the close of the nominations period.
o 提名期结束时，候选人的姓名将与所有其他候选人的姓名一起公布。
o Except as noted above, all information provided to the IAB during this process will be kept as confidential to the IAB and, when established, the advisory committee.
o 除上文所述外，在此过程中向IAB提供的所有信息均将保密给IAB和咨询委员会（如成立）。
Subject to further negotiations and in the interest of providing stability, terms of office are expected to be five years with no restrictions on renewals and with provision for shorter actual contracts and intermediate reviews. In addition, an effort should be made so that terms of office for the RSE, ISE, and RFC Production Center do not terminate concurrently.
根据进一步的谈判并为了提供稳定，任期预计为五年，不限制续约，并规定缩短实际合同和中期审查。此外，应努力确保RSE、ISE和RFC生产中心的任期不会同时终止。
The selection timeframe for 2009 is roughly:
2009年的选择时间大致如下：
June - IAB calls for nominations for ISE and RSE positions;
6月-IAB要求提名ISE和RSE职位；
July - A Committee conducts interviews;
七月——一个委员会进行采访；
Mid-August - Committee recommends individuals to IAB for ISE and RSE positions;
8月中旬-委员会建议个人向IAB申请ISE和RSE职位；
Second half of September - IAB appoints ISE and RSE, subject to successful negotiations of agreement with IAOC;
9月下旬-IAB任命ISE和RSE，但需与IAOC成功协商协议；
Mid-October - Memorandums of understanding (MOUs) executed with IAD, ISE for expenses, RSE for stipend and expenses;
10月中旬-与IAD签署谅解备忘录（MOU），ISE负责费用，RSE负责津贴和费用；
Mid-October - Transition begins;
十月中旬——过渡开始；
January 2010 - Contract begins.
2010年1月-合同开始。
The timeline for future selections is subject to recommendation from the RSAG and review by the IAB.
未来选择的时间表取决于RSAG的建议和IAB的审查。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Olaf M. Kolkman (editor)
奥拉夫·科尔克曼（编辑）
EMail: olaf@nlnetlabs.nl
EMail: olaf@nlnetlabs.nl
Internet Architecture Board
互联网架构委员会
EMail: iab@iab.org
EMail: iab@iab.org