Ted,
On 2013-10-18 23:10, Ted Lemon wrote:
The most useful comment I've heard on this thread is that it makes sense to credit the working group chairs as well as the authors of a document in the document at the same level of emphasis. And possibly the ADs as well. I don't know if this would make a difference, but it's interesting, and might be worth the experiment.
Would this be an implementation of what you say (example built on
one of our recent RFCs)
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Chen
Request for Comments: 6829 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Updates: 4379 P. Pan
Category: Standards Track Infinera
ISSN: 2070-1721 C. Pignataro
Responsible AD: A. Farrel, Juniper R. Asati
WG Chair/Shepherd: L. Andersson, Huawei Cisco
January 2013
Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for
Pseudowire Forwarding Equivalence Classes (FECs) Advertised over IPv6
Note: This is not a suggestion, just a question for clarification. And
if we want to do it "this way" it is not a layout proposal. If we do it
like this we would have a second level effect in capturing the
shepeherds, wg chairs and responsible ADs addresses in separate section
following the Authors Addresses.
/Loa
But really, the main thing to say about this conversation is that it's a classic example of why the AD's job is so time consuming. We have to monitor these conversations, because otherwise we aren't doing the part of our job that involves listening to the IETF. Having long bikeshed discussions about the woeful brokenness of the AD's job over and over again without any action proposed is expensive.
Most of what's been discussed here has been discussed by the ADs during the recent IESG retreat, and substantial action was taken as a result of the discussion at that retreat. It might be interesting to see if any of what we discussed actually changes anything.
--
Loa Andersson email: loa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Senior MPLS Expert loa@xxxxx
Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64