On 19 Oct 2013, at 12:37, "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I am struggling to see why name an AD on the front page. > There is already a way in the Data Tracker to find out which AD "responsible" at > the time of IESG approval. Unless another AD reassigns it before AUTH48. But your general point is valid. > I do not want or see value in being patted on the head for the publication of an > RFC. > > What is the purpose? > What would be the implication? > > Adrian > >>> On Oct 18, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@xxxxx> wrote: >>>> 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 > RFC Editor website already have web pages with supplementary information (obsoleted, errata, etc). Can this information be shown there?