For the record, I tend to dislike pollution of the RFC series with PR
blurbs as well. This having been said, I would be far more interested
in a discussion about the actual substantive content of the document.
Eliot
On 10/5/11 2:23 AM, Douglas Otis wrote:
On 10/4/11 9:09 AM, J.D. Falk wrote:
"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.
I agree with Frank on this issue. The PR blurb should not be
included. If MAAWG finds removal unacceptable, they are free to
publish the document themselves among their other documents. MAAWG
has a closed membership heavily influenced by ISPs and high volume
senders. The IETF has normally resisted this type of influence by not
referring to specific organizations. Such influence is not always
beneficial from the perspective of many IETF objectives.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf