Hi Donald,
The problem is that most people don't complain or don't like to
complain, that is reality, they will leave such society easily. So
does the IETF have some kind of self check without the commentor
complaining. I suggest the WG chair to maintain the WG I-Ds, and if
individual I-D then the AD responsible to maintain that,
AB
On 2/9/13, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
I try to include in the Acknowledgements section of any Internet
Drafts I edit the names of anyone who comments on the draft if (1) the
comment results in a change in the draft and (2) the commenter does
not request that they be left out. If you comment on some draft and
the draft is changed as a result and you want to be acknowledged and
you are not added to the acknowledgements list, you should complain to
the editor / author.
Thanks,
Donald
=============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
d3e3e3(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Abdussalam Baryun
<abdussalambaryun(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi folks,
I am wondering how author/ietf-editor fill in the acknowledgement
section in the RFCs or I-Ds. Does it make sense in IETF, or left for
author opinion? I am getting requests from IETF WGs, IESG, and IAB for
comments. My question is do you *make acknowledgements* in I-Ds or
just *take comments* for I-Ds?
IMO we get last call request for comments because RFC production is
all about getting volunteering comments from Internet community to
make I-Ds better, so does all I-Ds acknowledge (ACK) to any input
comment before the last call and after or it is only before last
call?, and if it gets submitted to IESG/IAB, and we comment does that
have no ACK in I-D?
I sometimes feel discouraged to participate in any world work if the
process does not involve my existance, just used with ignoring ACK of
the reviewers. IMO any comment has value to the authors (e.g. some
think only experts' comments are important to ACK) and to IETF,
otherwise, we may delete valuable ACKs in IETF, which is not right.
Best Regards
AB
A participant that still did not complete a year working for IETF, but
trying to continue :)