Re: Unhelpful draft names

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

 



--On Monday, March 09, 2015 21:58 +0100 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
<jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I will agree on that convention Š but to be honest, didn¹t
> heard about that before Š

Jordi, once upon a time, before we had automatic submissions,
the convention was not only documented in the instructions to
I-D authors but enforced by the secretariat. Even inventions
like "ymbk" and "farresnickel" sometimes required a bit of
negotiating with the Secretariat and a document that had Jones
and Smith as authors and that was named
draft-jones-smith-CleverName-00 would, IIR, be rejected.

For  the reasons Brian gives (and a few others), I'd very much
like to see the submission tools modified in much the way Paul
Hoffman suggests.

However, in recent years, I've tried raising this a few times
and have gotten no traction and more than one rude suggestion
that I just suck it up.    The result is that I've largely
adopted the model implied by Brian's note -- I assume that, if I
can't figure out either who the author is or what a draft is
about, the author either wants to post an I-D but doesn't care
whether anyone reads it or not or is so busy being impressed by
his or her own cleverness that it is unlikely that the draft
contains anything of use.    The observation that at least one
notorious troll periodically posted drafts with non-informative
names reinforce that view.

best,
   john






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