Re: Status of <draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-16.txt> in AUTH48

[[e-mail]]

> Until now I've been following this "discussion" in the mailing lists in
> amazement, I could not fathom how or why the just.appointed IETF chair,
> who also happens to be co-author of the document, could possibly think
> that questioning the addition of a single paragraph in the
> acknowledgements section of an RFC made sense or was necessary action,
> and how AD or WG could possibly think this should be open for a public
> discussion.

I have to agree. This whole discussion seems utterly unnecessary, not
to mention silly. The acknowledgement should be allowed, end of story.

> In summary, I believe that nitpicking on the Acknowledgments section of
> an RFC while allowing for traditions like the April 1st RFCs or being
> much more flexible on the actual technical contents of several drafts
> and standards does not set a good precedent here.

Fully agreed.

> If this is really
> considered an actual issue for discussion, I'd like to suggest an
> alternative solution:
> 
> Simply let the acknowledgments stand and initiate work on an RFC that
> would either update or replace RFC 7322 with normative guidance.
> 
> Baring that, I sincerely hope the RFC Editor brings back the sanity and
> common sense that I find lacking in this whole affair.

Agreed.

Steinar Haug, AS2116