Dear all, I think that if there is an objetion of many people, that would be OK if we put the IETF as author and IESG as contact. This, I think, will be considered as appropriate for this ocasion. Moreover, if I do not want to provide my contact data except email to the community, that is my right, anyway. All the best, Mykyta Yevstifeyev 2011/1/12, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > At 08:29 11-01-11, t.petch wrote: >>The provenance of the editor is unknown to >>me - and of course, once an RFC has been through the IETF processes, >>then the editorship is an irrelevance - but I am concerned that I have >>no awareness of the contact provided as the scheme 'Author/Change >> controller', >>no track record, no affiliation, a gmail address. This seems more than >>discourtesy, this seems wrong. > > There is a city and country mentioned under Author's Address. It is > not the first time an author uses a gmail address. If an author is > new to the IETF, he or she won't have any track record within the IETF. > > According to the RFC Style Guide: > > "Contact information must include at least one, and ideally would > include all, of a postal address, a telephone number and/or FAX > number, and a long-lived email address. The purpose of this section > is to (1) unambiguously define author/contributor identity (e.g., the > John Smith who works for FooBar Systems) and to (2) provide contact > information for future readers who have questions or comments. Note > that some professional societies offer long-lived email addresses for > their members." > > Regards, > -sm > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf