All,
Please misunderstand me correctly!
I'm not proposing adding AD's or wg chairs on the first page of RFCs,
just trying to figure out what Ted had in mind.
Don't say I that i succeeded in that. But Ted at least nodded slightly.
Ted and Carsten approached this from a credit perspective; I guess that
is valid. I'm more thinking about from a public "right to know"
respective - "How was that lousy wg chair that let this through?"
I admit that there are other ways to this, but the most public product
we have are the RFCs.
I think it should be discussed from both perspectives. I know that my
ADs, myself and my co-chairs and others, put enough effort into an RFCs
from end of wglc to AUTH48 to be mentioned e.g. in Acknowledgement
section, but I want to keep this strictly at the authors leisure.
So the combination giving credit and making responsibility clearly
visible makes this at least worth to discuss,
On the other hand a less more public way would be to what IAB on
their RFCs, add a section "IAB Members at the Time of Approval"!
Maybe and Appendix "WG Chairs, Shepherd and responsible AD at the
time of the Approval".
Sorry for meandering, but I feel that there is something worth
capturing in that part of the discussion.
On 2013-10-19 19:41, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On Oct 19, 2013, at 13:37, "Adrian Farrel"
<adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
I am struggling to see why name an AD on the front page.
Yeah, sounds dangerous. Will further increase the threshold for getting an RFC
out :-)
Seriously: The discussion was about WG chairs, and there it might make more
sense.
(But my original idea was not about changing the RFC process at all, but about
adding accessible information to the IETF web site.)
Grüße, Carsten
--
Loa Andersson email:
loa(_at_)mail01(_dot_)huawei(_dot_)com
Senior MPLS Expert loa(_at_)pi(_dot_)nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64