RE: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: J.D. Falk [mailto:jdfalk-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 9:09 AM
> To: Barry Leiba
> Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC
> 
> >> "About MAAWG
> >>
> >>   MAAWG [1] is the largest global industry association working against
> >>   Spam, viruses, denial-of-service attacks and other online
> >>   exploitation.  Its' members include ISPs, network and mobile
> >>   operators, key technology providers and volume sender organizations.
> >>   It represents over one billion mailboxes worldwide and its membership
> >>   contributed their expertise in developing this description of current
> >>   Feedback Loop practices."
> >>
> >> Could the PR blurb be removed?
> >
> > I think it's useful in this document.  People reading IETF documents
> > aren't likely to know what MAAWG is, and a short paragraph doesn't
> > seem untoward.  I'd agree, if there were excessively long text for
> > this, but it's brief.
> 
> MAAWG will insist on keeping this.  The primary purpose, in my mind, is
> to show that even though this wasn't written within the IETF it was
> still written by people who really do know what they're talking about.

I support its inclusion based on this, and simply to provide some context about what MAAWG is.  To Frank's comment, I suggest changing "the largest" to "a large", and leaving the rest as-is.  If people really hate its placement up-front, perhaps it could appear in an appendix instead, but I'm fine with it where it is.

I don't think the IETF needs to be too worried about publishing an externally-generated document as an RFC given that it's Informational only, and is directly related to work that is going on in a current working group.  I suspect it would be more of a concern if it were re-publishing something onto the Standards Track without sending it through a working group first.

(And "Its'" should be "Its".)

-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]