Yakov,
You can ask yourself: if this document is published as RFC
xxxx, can you imagine a future technical discussion in the
IETF or outside directing readers to RFC xxxx? "
I would imagine that the discussions would lead readers to a collection
of existing sites that employ disposable addresses first, primarily
because this document is just way too light. Not to say it should have
more beef, because there's not a whole lotta beef one can add to this
topic in the first place.
So, IMO, this document doesn't pass the "potentially useful" test
because it doesn't significantly rise above the existing noise level.
I'm sorry but I'm too ignorant of the RFC process to
understand "how
worthwhile" a document needs to be in order to be published.
From the RFC Editor:
"
Our criteria for individual submissions are very general: a
document should be technically competent and potentially
useful. We particularly seek your advice on technical
competence -- we don't like to publish something is is
embarrassingly wrong, although controversial can be OK. Your
comments on utility will also be useful.
You can ask yourself: if this document is published as RFC
xxxx, can you imagine a future technical discussion in the
IETF or outside directing readers to RFC xxxx? "
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg