Melinda, folks in the research community (e.g., students) need some publications and being mentioned in documents is quite important for them. >> Now, I know by experience that even significant contributions to an >> I-D does not guarantee you a place in the acknowledgement section. If the authors don't like you then you don't end up there. OR If the authors are lazy then they just forget to add you. In general, I find it important to list those who have spent their time with a specification. Sometimes it appears that reviewers spend more time with the specification than the authors. Ciao Hannes >-----Original Message----- >From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On >Behalf Of Melinda Shore >Sent: 04 March, 2009 20:21 >To: Marc Petit-Huguenin; Ned Freed >Cc: Harald Alvestrand; ietf@xxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: Running Code > >On 3/4/09 12:17 PM, "Marc Petit-Huguenin" <petithug@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Now, I know by experience that even significant contributions to an >> I-D does not guarantee you a place in the acknowledgement section. >> So what is the incentive into developing code that 1) will >probably be >> obsoleted by the next version of the I-D and 2) will not be >> acknowledged at all in contributing to the improvement of >the protocol? > >I tend to assume people will be interested in a protocol for >some other reasons than garnering acknowledgements and >fluffing their resumes, and those other reasons will >presumably be sufficient motivation. Implementing something >will tend to be a pretty good way to find bugs, >inefficiencies, or other problems with a protocol >specification. If you're interested in kudos, take the issues >you find to the mailing list rather than directly to the author. > >I'm pretty surprised by this argument. > >Melinda > > >_______________________________________________ >Ietf mailing list >Ietf@xxxxxxxx >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf