IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 02 June 2015 21:58 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC5A31B30CC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 14:58:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.663
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 z03IdxhQZXJT for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 14:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C1651A8FD4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 14:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 3542 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2015 21:58:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2015 21:58:17 -0000
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 21:57:47 -0000
Message-ID: <20150602215747.35990.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors
In-Reply-To: <C40606B1-4F3E-423C-8813-1AAD2EF19A0D@nominum.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/APgyLmkgVzMauCphWR1TY_WX2Wc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 02 Jun 2015 21:58:11 -0000

>> So  there is an opportunity for a surprise author to alert the IESG & RFC
>> editor.
>Yes, there is a chance to publicly humiliate the submitter. I would not want to do that, so your proposed solution doesn't address my need. 

Considering that most of these situations appear to be mistakes, why
should correcting this mistake be more humiliating than correcting the
zillions of other mistakes fixed from one version of an I-D to the
next?

R's,
John

PS: If it's not clear, this is a real question.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email