Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
While not harmful, I'm not sure this is necessary if the more-or-less
standard naming convention for drafts is followed for non-WG drafts:
draft-conroy-sipping-foo-bar
indicates that the author Conroy believes the sipping WG to be the
appropriate place for discussion, just like
draft-sipping-foo-bar
indicates the same, without the need to dig through a document. This
is also a good idea since the WG tools page seems to use the same
algorithm. Obviously, if there is no appropriate working group at all,
this doesn't work, but maybe an area indication is sufficient:
draft-conroy-rai-foo-bar
If we eventually get new I-D submissions tools, it seems easy enough
to enforce such a naming scheme.
As long as mail contains the draft name in the subject line, it's not
too much a burden for either author or WG to see those comments or to
search for them.
For a lot of drafts, including those that come before the formation of a
WG, or those that are associated with a non-WG mailing list, this is not
appropriate.
Being explicit is good.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf