I think we need a to define a process for a license to post emails to ietf@xxxxxxxx
including qualifications such as:
a) Ability, willingness and experience to change Subjects lines of emails
in a thread, when one changes the content subject.
b) Identifying the correct mailing list to direct an email to, such as to only ever
discuss IETF track RFC subjects on the ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing list and other subjects
on e.g.: {rfc-interest,rswg}@ietf.org
c) Proven proficiency to be woken up at 3AM in the morning and painting an SVG of an
org-chart covering IETF, IRTF, IAB, ISOC, LLC, IESG, ICANN, IEPG, IANA, Trust, CNRI, RFC-Editor
and the Ministry of Silly Walks.
Cheers
Toerless
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 11:54:50PM -0400, Joel Halpern wrote:
> There is one aspect of this conversation that strikes me as odd. The April 1
> RFCs are not IETF products. They are not an IETF decision. They are not
> subject to IETF policy. So I do not see how they relate to the topics at
> hand.
>
> Yours,
>
> Joel
>
> PS: Eric, using your note only because it is uncontroversial, not because I
> have any problem with what you wrote.
>
> On 10/16/2022 4:57 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> > > I don't agree to respect the funny RFCs which are issued in April a waste of time and effort, I will not call
> > > it any word that makes me out of the list but it is very strange that some participants say it is IETF culture,
> > > which I don't seem to know if IETF have defined what is its culture or defining motives for such funny-RFCs.
> > > So I don't respect those RFCs because it does not title that it is a joke or drama,
> > >
> > > The reader needs to be respected, so the technology-producer, or document-producer needs to
> > > respect/understand the Reader's interests, without making him feel bad. I discussed about this before, but maybe time will help,
> > I would not call April 1st RFC as "culture", but it is indeed quite deep in the "folklore" and traditions of the IETF. It may be linked to the fact that April 1st jokes are told in my own country even on mainstream newspapers and TV channels, therefore I can understand that other IETF'ers do not find this funny. In this case, there are usually easy to spot (they are the only ones having a day in the publication date) to allow either a careful reading with a smile or to skip the reading.
> >
> > The whole intent is to bring smile on several faces, not to waste time of course.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > -éric (author of RFC 5514 published on this very special date)
> >
> > PS: I had more fun writing this useless RFC than for any of my other RFCs ;-)
> >
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
