I don't think credit for assisting work should be out of acknowledge section, and don't give credit in work for responsible duties given by organisation in titles/position, preferred to give credit to full title duties not per work/task. Preferred to give credit per work mostly to whom made efforts without given titles but their only intention is better document/work but still IESG may not acknowledge them or not understand the vision :(
On 10/19/13, Loa Andersson <loa@xxxxx> wrote:
> 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
>