[ we need a new rat-hole as relief from pico-managing the selection of a board on which no one sane would want to be ] this is meant to raise consciousness, not cause process-creation or other complexity. over in the research universe, (most; hi dan) folk are careful about citing prior work in the area, especially if it is seminal. we seem to be somewhat sloppy over here in standards wonk land; and i am not entirely comfortable with this. but can we do anything when we find a missing cite? to have an example, and not meaning to pick on anyone, rfc 7747 uses the methods of, but does not cite, the 2001 seminal work in the area of routing convergence measurement by shaikh and greenberg, http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.910.8379 yes, it is somewhat painful when the cite would be to a non-rfc, as our external citing mechanisms are clumsy. i assume a missing cite is not an erratum. so maybe nothing can be done other than to encourage authors to be more careful. in general, the ietf has a weak culture of good citing. and i guess i could/should have flagged this particular example in a last call <blush>. randy
