ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

rfc-ed reference style [Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP]

2003-03-17 08:17:40
On Sun, 16 Mar 2003, Pekka Savola wrote:
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request to consider Instructions to Request for 
Comments (RFC) Authors <draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-04.txt> as a BCP.  
This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF 
Working Group.

a very important thing to note
------------------------------

   [10] Eastlake, D. and E. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level DNS Names", RFC
        2606, June 1999.
==> hopefully this isn't the reference practise, should be s/E.
Panitz/Panitz, E./, right?  

This seems to be happening with almost all the drafts, with the last of
multiauthor lists, so I'm fearing a bug in the tools?

(of course, tools aren't the problem of IESG, RFC-ED etc. as such, but 
should be noted and corrected ASAP.)

After getting a few private clarifying remarks (thanks!), I'd like to 
expand this a bit.

It seems this reference model is a "tradition" of a kind.

However, now that the RFC-ed policies are being re-reviewed, it should be 
excellent time to fix problems, with all due respect.

Unless, of course, there was some particular point to always writing the 
_last_ author (and that only) wrong (in the case that author-count > 1).

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings