Re: The RFC Acknowledgement

ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com Sat, 09 February 2013 04:05 UTC

Return-Path: <ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.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 2FF2D21F8A64 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:05:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gkdp-K5UjjJT for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:05:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B080D21F8886 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:05:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01OPYNT5TB1C008LP8@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:00:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="iso-8859-1"
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01OPEL6ZTPUO00008S@mauve.mrochek.com> (original mail from NED@mauve.mrochek.com) for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 19:59:58 -0800 (PST)
From: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com
Message-id: <01OPYNT46WUA00008S@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 19:55:54 -0800
Subject: Re: The RFC Acknowledgement
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 08 Feb 2013 22:36:24 -0500" <CAF4+nEFGdiwFiRkVtUQLR6b89c3SdpVcOmHULe35hwd+wg8CsA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADnDZ8_E-cDqhXWV-f3MjoDo9hFeCVAdVTmRQ+McA--_3smyJQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEFGdiwFiRkVtUQLR6b89c3SdpVcOmHULe35hwd+wg8CsA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 04:05:02 -0000

> I try to include in the Acknowledgements section of any Internet
> Drafts I edit the names of anyone who comments on the draft if (1) the
> comment results in a change in the draft and (2) the commenter does
> not request that they be left out. If you comment on some draft and
> the draft is changed as a result and you want to be acknowledged and
> you are not added to the acknowledgements list, you should complain to
> the editor / author.

That's exactly the policy Nathaniel Borenstein and I agreed to use for MIME.
I've used it ever since for all the documents I have edited, and it seems to
have worked well. (And apologies to anyone whose name I have omitted under that
policy - if I did that it was entirely inadvertent.)

The only time I've ever had an acknowledgments section has been when an author
or contributor is deceased. This very unfortunate situation is quite delicate
and merits handling on a case-by-case basis; IMO no specific policy could
possibly be written to accomodate it.

				Ned