On 19 Oct 2013, at 12:37, "Adrian Farrel"
<adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
I am struggling to see why name an AD on the front page.
There is already a way in the Data Tracker to find out which AD "responsible"
at
the time of IESG approval.
Unless another AD reassigns it before AUTH48. But your general point is valid.
I do not want or see value in being patted on the head for the publication of
an
RFC.
What is the purpose?
What would be the implication?
Adrian
On Oct 18, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Loa Andersson <loa(_at_)pi(_dot_)nu> wrote:
Would this be an implementation of what you say (example built on
one of our recent RFCs)
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Chen
Request for Comments: 6829 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Updates: 4379 P. Pan
Category: Standards Track Infinera
ISSN: 2070-1721 C. Pignataro
Responsible AD: A. Farrel, Juniper R. Asati
WG Chair/Shepherd: L. Andersson, Huawei Cisco
RFC Editor website already have web pages with supplementary information
(obsoleted, errata, etc). Can this information be shown there?