IETF Logo Mail Archive

[rfc-i] DOIs (was: [DNSOP] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9276 (8090 ))

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Mon, 26 August 2024 20:56 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95730C1D5316 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:56:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.707
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.707 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KV8zrGqFrDb1 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367E0C1D5315 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([207.242.50.40]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id 47QKtrMq022475 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1724705765; x=1724792165; i=@elandsys.com; bh=SyOGCXD6hFtK3KPRpr02RpH5unbV46VGRQzHZpgRHDc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=ehtKHNML3eJrAjK0L0x7bmGh/gDiMK0tV+KgrDrCTfC1lyOcLol+qbe7OFK8LFKPi LO0EFbkg0wv7nuxz8XIKIkSORZRuSYmE3IUFuHvmGttFY6eoVQPsc+g08YZ1Onl+3t TqDyaamLxtlKJdW8CzUETh6bdFykL5lrVLYFKhy0=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20240826133635.19b9a9a0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:54:25 -0700
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240826195355.CB575927BBDC@ary.qy>
References: <20240826121834.87C267FA63@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org> <20240826195355.CB575927BBDC@ary.qy>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Message-ID-Hash: 2PF7STKMWOHL3OQI6N7MSF7O4YA2TZA3
X-Message-ID-Hash: 2PF7STKMWOHL3OQI6N7MSF7O4YA2TZA3
X-MailFrom: sm@elandsys.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [rfc-i] DOIs (was: [DNSOP] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9276 (8090 ))
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/s8tsACJrTzLJYouiK8mUT1H_4B8>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:rfc-interest-owner@rfc-editor.org>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:rfc-interest-join@rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rfc-interest-leave@rfc-editor.org>

Hi John,

[reply moved to rfc-i]

At 12:53 PM 26-08-2024, John Levine wrote:
>It appears that RFC Errata System  <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> said:
> >-------------
> >  [ZONEENUM] Wang, Z., Xiao, L., and R. Wang, "An efficient DNSSEC zone
> >              enumeration algorithm", DOI 10.2495/MIIT130591, April
> >              2014, <https://doi.org/10.2495/MIIT130591>.
>
>This page at researchgate says it was given at:
>
>International conference on Management Innovation and Information 
>Technology, Volume: 61

The DOI was inserted prior to publication (re. RFC Editor function).

There was a previous erratum about a DOI [1].  I was a bit surprised 
to see that the DOI was changed after RFC publication.  I expected 
DOIs to make it easier to find the work being cited ...

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/UwuzTz-JWkxCNtfIsYEbK5DCACA/

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status