IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-eai-rfc5721bis-07,

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 21 September 2012 16:22 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB6421F877E; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.565
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tt1Togg1hNu0; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:22:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 201EA21F8777; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:22:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.7] (ppp-67-124-89-127.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.124.89.127]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q8LGM5nT021541 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:22:06 -0700
Message-ID: <505C9425.8040306@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:21:57 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
References: <8CE78C42-20B9-45BC-A872-90E7FBE27D24@nostrum.com> <505C866B.9050506@qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <505C866B.9050506@qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:22:06 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org Review Team" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org List" <ietf@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-eai-rfc5721bis.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-eai-rfc5721bis-07,
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:22:08 -0000

On 9/21/2012 8:23 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
> On 9/18/12 8:45 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:abstract should mention that this obsoletes 5721
>
> It does.


Stylistic point:  RFCs last a long time.  Including ephemeral 
information can be distracting, especially in the Abstract.  5 and 10 
years from now, the fact that this RFC replaces another will be 
essentially irrelevant, but the Abstract will still be spending valuable 
space citing the fact.

It is better to have the document written as standing on its own, rather 
than focus on its relationship to its predecessors, except perhaps in 
isolated 'background' or 'history' discussions (and, of course, the 
Updates field...)


d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email