Re: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

SM says...
>> The short title of the draft is "CFBL BCP".  Given the recent short
>> discussion about the use of "BCP", I suggest changing that.

Murray says...
> Does the filename really matter?

He's not talking about the filename; the short title is what's printed
at the top of every page.  It comes from the "abbrev" parameter in the
"title" element in the XML.  It can be changed with an RFC Editor
note.

SM says...
>  "This document is an attempt to codify, and thus clarify, the ways that
>   both providers and consumers of these feedback mechanisms intend to use
>   the feedback, describing some already-common industry practices."
>
> I suggest using "document" instead of "codify" as this is not being
> standardized.

That's a sensible change.

> "About MAAWG
>
>   MAAWG [1] is the largest global industry association working against
>   Spam, viruses, denial-of-service attacks and other online
>   exploitation.  Its' members include ISPs, network and mobile
>   operators, key technology providers and volume sender organizations.
>   It represents over one billion mailboxes worldwide and its membership
>   contributed their expertise in developing this description of current
>   Feedback Loop practices."
>
> Could the PR blurb be removed?

I think it's useful in this document.  People reading IETF documents
aren't likely to know what MAAWG is, and a short paragraph doesn't
seem untoward.  I'd agree, if there were excessively long text for
this, but it's brief.

Barry