Re: How to get feedback on published RFCs [resending as plaintext]

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 19 July 2016 14:54 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD0B12D8CD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sqC2Qnf0pobF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x232.google.com (mail-lf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D94D12D9CD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id f93so16017235lfi.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WEJRX73W0965xWLWQcswtr//3ORNvGpiQn1QkMGs7Mk=; b=sK+OgjieFfd/etBUl/xC18ZrWc2qjWp5DrGKtjF8d8X29MW75A9hu2lRhviMSIBIkP g6FZIxuFp6zhsjNrJUkOc4iuWCWdG2qmpOPEsy+9VlpwIicBzcIkjS2AZiDJ3d3VvurM 2K78jrBCZM2p9Hfa7QiPzOxFCSb96P19hGPLoa25tJETSu/VOMBEXgU9MEqORfGVbXKx j4YAPTsfHmAc5ZNsx1bcaKRpd4wNK5C6l3zRkqwZzXkYmhPMa9n54Tlh2mj8rSpYVULk WdMFmX0DvDJ8z5O5Gh+sAdJuuigstqnZtCciATNJgLlHz/HUpdMeoyC3LsVTB24sbCDh JmDQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WEJRX73W0965xWLWQcswtr//3ORNvGpiQn1QkMGs7Mk=; b=arEHiE9Wg/rVy29btZFLRj55jQ4/yTcf642EVAQ9hj+FYgX5BAsUpfbd2IyIXqxUxK Xc53CSaFosci+pExWV1Z9NDvHaYwRZfAmwvaulzlz5XzjLlEhb1FDX2anH6rSqjogsNy Y2SF8DZIQKfOsiSgRyhLWwXGNP/fM4fP3AOP6LcnTZWGaWnlhDdJuX3yoA6Zq+JEpnjn jo1/+UILz4SjfDpfhkNd2ELhXDw59IdeGio3t7viw4cqK8UC6Phs97iAunKGBrxkwzhc yBr5O0SdjAQzAtsYrscJhN25epfoTkczSqmHSFhc/X5potckJFCIYpJC/jl3aHhQ1CN9 /lUQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLjusBnykIRSHq1ntQRkMgAbxOK70hbJGE0fjHZBg++7jML1SE31kssG2lDDRCzCyBBY73jlNZTzN/F5g==
X-Received: by 10.25.131.150 with SMTP id f144mr14737815lfd.53.1468938662382; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.217.219 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:30:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B05266CE983@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
References: <578E14F4.2040000@gmail.com> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B05266CE983@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 16:30:21 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1nCWUjjQbA-ZCqoHn9ssKYhOpKLRzY64SQHLdoKLHDjoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How to get feedback on published RFCs [resending as plaintext]
To: "MH Michael Hammer (5304)" <MHammer@ag.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f20b82b27390537fdef25"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3UE4IvRhjb3H744ghS5hPdgVMBo>
Cc: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 14:54:30 -0000

Doing nothing is always an option.   These kind folks are proposing doing
something, though, rather than nothing.   This makes sense, because the
working group might no longer exist, and email archives are useless for
getting a summary of perhaps a few years of commentary that may have
occurred.

Do you have a specific objection to doing something, or do you just not
want to have to be the one to do it?   :)


On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 3:16 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) <MHammer@ag.com>
wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yaron Sheffer
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 7:54 AM
> > To: IETF
> > Subject: How to get feedback on published RFCs [resending as plaintext]
> >
> > Once an RFC is published, there is essentially no way for readers to
> provide
> > feedback: what works, what are the implementation pitfalls, how does the
> > document relate to other technologies or even to other RFCs.
> >
> > We IETF insiders usually know what is the relevant working group, and can
> > take our feedback there. Non-insiders though don't have any contact
> point,
> > and so will most likely keep their feedback to themselves. These
> non-IETFers
> > are the target audience of our documents! Unfortunately, our so-called
> > "Requests for Comments" are anything but an invitation to submit
> > comments.
> >
>
> A simple solution would be to include a pointer to the relevant working
> group as a header or note to the RFC. There could be a standard "How to
> comment" section. No need for additional tools or process.
>
> Mke
>