On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Frank Ellermann wrote:
william(at)elan.net wrote:
Author/Change controller: IESG based on recommendation
of SPF Council
Related Information: SPF Council Website -
http://spf.mehnle.net/
What should it be changed to?
That is what I recommended it be changed to.
Co-opting the IESG under the "overview" of the SPF Council
smells like net suicide ;-) For a real world example see 3865:
o Author/Change controller: IETF
Since you want to submit this for standard track and not
experimental, having personal name/address there may not be
appropriate.
RfC 3864 says:
| Author/Change controller:
| For Internet standards-track, state "IETF". For other
| open standards, give the name of the publishing body
| (e.g., ANSI, ISO, ITU, W3C, etc.).
We're not yet at plan-B with full IETF liaison agreements etc.,
Jabber avoided this bureaucracy too so far. "IETF" should do.
I still would prefer to have SPF Council mentioned as reviewer even
if IETF is final authority. So perhaps this:
Author/Change controller: IETF
Related Information:
Requesting SPF Council review of any proposed changes and additions
to this field is recommended. For information about SPF Council see
http://spf.mehnle.net/
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net