On the tradition of I-D "Acknowledgements" sections (was: Re: [manet] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-sec-threats-02.txt)

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

 



On Mar 24, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> You mean the editors of this draft (I will note them as not
> acknowledging participants, for my future review). I am a MANET WG
> participants, but if you mention the names that made efforts it is
> more true because many are MANET participants and never send a
> comment. Please note that IETF mentioned, Request For Comments= RFC. I
> commented on the draft, and will only continue commenting on drafts
> that are edited and monitored by acknowledging IETF participants.
> ...

It is non-sensical to expect document editors to track and list everybody
who had input on a given draft, particularly when one considers the volume
of comments received on many of the mailing lists and working groups.

The "Acknowledgements section" has a long tradition of listing those folks 
who provided substantial contributions to the document, and often has all 
others by reference in a "members of the Foo working group" mention in that 
section.

In my opinion, it would be a shame for any IETF energies to be diverted for 
the purposes of second-guessing the good faith efforts of document editors
by revisiting this tradition where we already have successful running code.

/John

Disclaimers:  My views alone. This email acknowledges the members of the 
              "ietf" mailing list as influences used during preparation-
              please do not expect any other acknowledgement even if you 
              sent a message which you feel was formative to my thoughts.



    




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