Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration

Melinda Shore <> Wed, 21 May 2008 21:53 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882593A69F1; Wed, 21 May 2008 14:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5816F3A68FD; Wed, 21 May 2008 14:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lVWxUH5sJ8+k; Wed, 21 May 2008 14:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F2E3A68DA; Wed, 21 May 2008 14:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,522,1204531200"; d="scan'208";a="70845928"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 21 May 2008 14:53:08 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m4LLr8Hd009980; Wed, 21 May 2008 14:53:08 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4LLr6TF018409; Wed, 21 May 2008 21:53:08 GMT
Received: from ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 21 May 2008 17:53:06 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) via Exchange Front-End Server ([]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 21 May 2008 21:52:48 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 17:52:55 -0400
Subject: Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
From: Melinda Shore <>
To: Brian E Carpenter <>, Julian Reschke <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
Thread-Index: Aci7jQZERKOnqieAEd2vvgAKleNSdA==
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 May 2008 21:53:06.0787 (UTC) FILETIME=[0D4B2330:01C8BB8D]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1597; t=1211406788; x=1212270788; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;;; z=From:=20Melinda=20Shore=20<> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20ISSN=20for=20RFC=20Series=20under=20Con sideration |Sender:=20; bh=/QNnKsjT5q7f3v6FHAYJQnRMcgM/pshnyjtMRTOz11w=; b=m9jhNTpw+aDXfYwAlcw5BRWD72ez2vikJQMaalQX4ci3g0tsAX/RvgELDy LKiJUuw2Hsd10vVGvPSeRSRaqLbrYKsKsxpK6wWN/x5ebwnE1bKvRnCDHWTf TdFlg6sYyl;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3;; dkim=pass ( sig from verified; );
Cc: Working Group Chairs <>, IAB <>, IETF Discussion <>, IAOC <>, The IESG <>, RFC Editor <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 5/21/08 5:39 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <> wrote:
> Possibly not, but there is still a crusty old world of academic
> publications with traditional reference styles out there, and an ISSN
> will make it much more straightforward to cite RFCs in peer-reviewed
> publications. +1 that it's a no-brainer.

Hi - I'm really not trying to be a contrarian, just trying to
sort through the actual issues here.  I don't think I've ever seen
a reference that included an ISSN.  I've also never seen one
used as a subject header (index term) in cataloging.  The only
time I've personally seen them used is as *descriptive* information
in a  catalog (library catalog, publisher's catalog, etc.).  I'm
sure someone will be happy to dig up a counterexample but
I do think they're pretty unusual.  Really, what are the odds
that someone knows the ISSN but not the title or the author or
the publisher or ... ?

The practical benefit I see here is getting the Library of
Congress (and who knows?  maybe the British Library, etc.)
to catalog the series as a series, but again I'm unclear on
the practical benefit, since RFCs are incredibly easy to find
*as* RFCs; that is to say, by the information by which the
series will be cataloged and classified.

I don't see any disadvantage to doing it, it's just that I
can't see much advantage, either.  I figure we should just
go ahead and do it and not have any expectations that the
RFCs will be any more accessible, any more searchable, etc.
More like a change in status than a change in substance.


IETF mailing list