[CFRG] Re: Is it appropriate for an RFC to mention specific projects or companies?

[Antonio Sanso <[e-mail]>]

Vielen Dank für deine E-Mail. Ich habe meiner Schwester die Nachricht
übermittelt. Könntest du bitte den Grund mitteilen, warum er im Gefängnis
ist?

best

antonio

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 11:21 PM Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> On 8/1/2024 4:07 PM, Christopher Patton wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm looking for advice on how to close this open issue for
> > draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf:
> > https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/issues/338
> >
> > We currently mention a couple projects that motivated us to write down
> > these algorithms. Are there any guidelines at IRTF or IETF that can
> > help us figure out if this is appropriate?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris P.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CFRG mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> In Standards RFCs this is generally frowned upon in the main body of the
> document.   The standards process is supposed to be as open and
> contributor neutral as possible and anything that might hint of
> advertising should be avoided.
>
> For CRFG (and Informational and ISE) - go for it.  Among other things,
> knowing which projects informed a research topic is useful even without
> direct cites to the resultant research and papers. In this paper - after
> about 3 minutes quick review - I think all of the references and
> commentary are useful and supportive to the document.
>
> But, as Rich mentions, it's always OK to mention them - briefly - in the
> ACK section, regardless of the status of the RFC.
>
> AFAIK, the only specific mention about things like this relate to some
> mailing lists - e.g. prohibiting mailings on the IETF and IRTF lists
> about non-IETF/ISOC related meetings for example. (See RFC 3005).
> Alternately, take a quick look at 4.10 and 4.11 of RFC7322...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CFRG mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>