Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration

Melinda Shore <> Thu, 22 May 2008 13:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D7ED3A6AE5; Thu, 22 May 2008 06:14:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F6D3A6AE5 for <>; Thu, 22 May 2008 06:14:03 -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 zDQYasgG8CxD for <>; Thu, 22 May 2008 06:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC103A6ADE for <>; Thu, 22 May 2008 06:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,524,1204520400"; d="scan'208";a="9025194"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 22 May 2008 09:14:03 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m4MDE3ob016526; Thu, 22 May 2008 09:14:03 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4MDE3wQ012099; Thu, 22 May 2008 13:14:03 GMT
Received: from ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 22 May 2008 09:12:11 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) via Exchange Front-End Server ([]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 22 May 2008 13:11:55 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 09:12:03 -0400
Subject: Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
From: Melinda Shore <>
To: John C Klensin <>, Ed Juskevicius <>, Randy Presuhn <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
Thread-Index: Aci8DW0Jq2yLeCgAEd2vvgAKleNSdA==
In-Reply-To: <05AC5FC14BC5C80D8ADB7C46@[]>
Mime-version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 May 2008 13:12:11.0904 (UTC) FILETIME=[72583800:01C8BC0D]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1165; t=1211462043; x=1212326043; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; 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 |To:=20John=20C=20Klensin=20<>,=20Ed=20Jus kevicius=20<>,=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20Randy =20Presuhn=20<>; bh=4JMhxUtmxb5L6GwGbVXlP1eDScLZxWwX99ym5aTPD/M=; b=KiEFl/0+vtNYTO0ldRvVtEYeohpbt993vj0xTuhae0PIktktNG5gKPbRQq hL1UwYQ1e4n09Mp8NFGpkHC/Uigp5gHhOD/DkD14P9YukhaLMJP0dxa/Nyga k/NtI4gm/K;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1;; dkim=pass ( sig from verified; );
Cc: IETF Discussion <>
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 5/22/08 8:51 AM, "John C Klensin" <> wrote:
> Indeed, another way of looking at this question is that deciding
> to register an ISSN for the RFC series really does not preclude
> anything else (including, were we so inclined, putting DOIs on
> each RFC) and we should therefore be asking "ISSN or not ISSN"
> with all questions about other sorts of identifiers and
> cataloging being viewed as separate.

I think the cataloging question is probably central to the
question of whether or not to bother with an ISSN.  I don't
think an ISSN has any practical value other than that it
increases the likelihood that LC will catalog the series/
serial and that libraries will then start sticking it into
their electronic holdings.  Now, I'm not sure I see an
advantage to getting libraries to pick up RFCs given how
trivial it is to find them online, but that's another matter.
Another advantage is discrimination in the event that some other
serial publication is also called "Request for Comments," but
again I'm not sure that's an actual problem.  But mainly,
getting an ISSN gets the series into the library system.


IETF mailing list