Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration

Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com> Fri, 23 May 2008 01:25 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B59273A6B5D; Thu, 22 May 2008 18:25:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2743A6B92 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 May 2008 18:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.367
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.367 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.233, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5vaIZCIVVb5e for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 May 2008 18:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from multicasttech.com (lennon.multicasttech.com [63.105.122.7]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080203A6BC9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 May 2008 18:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [63.105.122.7] (account marshall_eubanks HELO [IPv6:::1]) by multicasttech.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 11478785; Thu, 22 May 2008 21:25:01 -0400
Message-Id: <78E903A1-8526-40D0-BC05-CDDBDF316013@multicasttech.com>
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
To: Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20080522100543.0254d3e0@boreas.isi.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Subject: Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 21:25:00 -0400
References: <C45AE963.389F6%mshore@cisco.com> <00FD433C-24C0-4007-B44E-8E073B9BC757@shinkuro.com> <0BDFFF51DC89434FA33F8B37FCE363D511F9504F@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <B1C1C7EE297828A38C9943D3@[172.22.20.167]> <80F67881-35FF-4748-BF2B-0AB28A1C2003@multicasttech.com> <6.1.2.0.2.20080522100543.0254d3e0@boreas.isi.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On May 22, 2008, at 1:08 PM, Bob Braden wrote:

>
>>
>>
>> Here is a concrete suggestion.
>>
>> We (for some definition of we) have the Internet Journal, which is
>> paper.
>> Publish a "Supplement of the Internet Journal," in paper, or on line,
>> which is
>>
>> - physically published 3 times a year
>> - has all of the RFC's published since then
>
>

I meant, of course, since the last one.

> The average RFC is 30 pages, and the average publication rate
> is O(30) per month.  That seems to work out to 3600 pages to
> be published with each Internet Journal.
>

Or order 10^4 pages per year for the Supplement.

BTW, it strikes me as interesting that in the physical archives of the  
IETF Trust there are
zero pages of printed RFCs. There are the cut and paste-on-paper  
viewgraph originals from IETF-1, but no printed
RFC's.

Regards
Marshall

Regards
Marshall

> Bob Braden
>
>> - includes the level 1 RFC errata as available
>> - includes other notes like RFC's that have been made obsolete, etc.
>> - charge it to cover costs at least (say, $ 500 / year for a
>> subscription).
>>
>> This would be picked up by at least some libraries, and would solve
>> the "on-line is ephemera" problem.
>>
>> Regards
>> Marshall
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Marshall, to your point:
>> >>
>> >>> It is easy to find RFC's now, but it may not be in a century.
>> >>>
>> >>> This may seem silly, but I think that RFCs will still
>> >>> have relevance in a century and, having experience
>> >>> searching for 100+ year old astronomical publications
>> >>> and data, in my opinion, RFC's need to be cataloged in
>> >>> libraries.
>> >>>
>> >>> Libraries have running code for the maintenance of
>> >>> intellectual property over centuries; the IETF does not.
>> >>
>> >> I agree with you 100%.  I think this is indeed a tangible and
>> >> desirable objective.
>> >
>> > Indeed.  And libraries, especially the subset of libraries that
>> > have national archival responsibilities, do pay attention to
>> > these identifiers.
>> >
>> >      john
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IETF mailing list
>> IETF@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
>

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf