ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC

2011-10-04 11:09:50
On Oct 4, 2011, at 7:17 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:

SM says...
The short title of the draft is "CFBL BCP".  Given the recent short
discussion about the use of "BCP", I suggest changing that.

Murray says...
Does the filename really matter?

He's not talking about the filename; the short title is what's printed
at the top of every page.  It comes from the "abbrev" parameter in the
"title" element in the XML.  It can be changed with an RFC Editor
note.

I'm certain MAAWG won't object to that change.  Do I need to send the note?

SM says...
 "This document is an attempt to codify, and thus clarify, the ways that
  both providers and consumers of these feedback mechanisms intend to use
  the feedback, describing some already-common industry practices."

I suggest using "document" instead of "codify" as this is not being
standardized.

That's a sensible change.

I lean more towards Frank Ellerman's interpretation (elsewhere in this thread), 
but if there's a strong interest in changing it then I won't push back much.

Perhaps a better change would be simply: "This document is an attempt to 
clarify the ways..."

"About MAAWG

  MAAWG [1] is the largest global industry association working against
  Spam, viruses, denial-of-service attacks and other online
  exploitation.  Its' members include ISPs, network and mobile
  operators, key technology providers and volume sender organizations.
  It represents over one billion mailboxes worldwide and its membership
  contributed their expertise in developing this description of current
  Feedback Loop practices."

Could the PR blurb be removed?

I think it's useful in this document.  People reading IETF documents
aren't likely to know what MAAWG is, and a short paragraph doesn't
seem untoward.  I'd agree, if there were excessively long text for
this, but it's brief.

MAAWG will insist on keeping this.  The primary purpose, in my mind, is to show 
that even though this wasn't written within the IETF it was still written by 
people who really do know what they're talking about.

--
J.D. Falk
the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>