Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
For what it's worth, Section 10 of the informational RFC 2223
("Instructions to RFC Authors") states:
Each RFC must have at the very end a section giving the author's
address, including the name and postal address, the telephone number,
(optional: a FAX number) and the Internet email address.
The Internet is not the type of chummy small-town environment where we
can trust just anybody with our home address and phone number, or our
bank account and credit card numbers, and where we can leave our front
doors unlocked at night.
I worked on two I-Ds in a WG where participant A once responded to
participant B's support of an RFC 3683 P-R action against A by
contacting B's employer, gleaned from his e-mail address, demanding that
the employer take professional action against B. In this type of
hostile environment, I declined to state my employer's name or post to
the WG list from my work address, much less divulge other personal
information, and edited both RFC 4645 and 5646 as "Consultant."
The argument that personal information is necessary to distinguish the
author from other people with the same name probably carries some weight
for authors named "John Smith" or "Bob Miller." There are few enough
people named "Doug Ewell" in the world that the risk of ambiguity of
authorship seems much more remote than the risk to personal security if
too much personal information is provided. I suspect the same is true
for people named "Mykyta Yevstifeyev."
Having said that, I don't think there is any precedent for I-D authors
or editors to claim their document was written by "IETF" or "IESG," and
I doubt this will be permitted.
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf