Dear John; On May 22, 2008, at 11:18 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Thursday, 22 May, 2008 11:00 -0400 Marshall Eubanks > <tme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Here is a concrete suggestion. >> >> We (for some definition of we) have the Internet Journal, >> which is paper. >> Publish a "Supplement of the Internet Journal," in paper, or >> on line, which is >> >> - physically published 3 times a year >> - has all of the RFC's published since then >> - includes the level 1 RFC errata as available >> - includes other notes like RFC's that have been made >> obsolete, etc. - charge it to cover costs at least (say, $ 500 >> / year for a subscription). >> >> This would be picked up by at least some libraries, and would >> solve the "on-line is ephemera" problem. > > Marshall, > > I think this is an interesting idea. It is, however, one that > would require some staffing, budget, working with ISOC on > arrangements, etc. I don't see any of those things as a big > deal, but I could be wrong. And they are certainly a bigger > deal than assigning an ISSN number and, if necessary, simply > running a printer and stuffing an envelope (as Bill suggested, > we've actually done that in the more or less distant past). It would certainly not be free. And, if you look at the prices for "Supplements," the per page cost tends to be high. For example, for "The Astrophysical Journal Supplement", a US subscription is $ 200 / year for a print copy, $ 28 for an on-line copy, for a journal printed on archival quality paper. The ApJ Supplement is about 300 pages / month or 3600 per year, for a per page cost of about 5.5 cents per page. The Internet Journal Supplement, with ~ 10^4 pages per year, would be ~ $ 556 / year for the same per page cost. The ApJ Supplement also provides editorial support which in this case is already paid for. What I would recommend before anything is done is that some _Librarians_ be asked for their opinion as to how to best get the RFC series archived in libraries. Regards Marshall > > > So my constructive suggestions are > > (i) Let's not make this hard for ourselves. > > (ii) Assigning an ISSN to the series would not interfere, in any > way, with what you suggest should the demand be there, either > for library subscriptions, as an added symbolic benefit for some > level of ISOC membership, or both. And, for some of the > purposes for which an ISSN for the RFC series would be a good > idea, assigning that number to a compendium that includes > non-RFC materials would be self-defeating. > > (iii) As someone suggested earlier in this thread, the IETF > Journal should probably have an ISSN of its own, but that is a > quite separate issue. > > regards, > john > _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf