On Fri, 19 Sep 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > BTW, http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-editor/instructions2authors.txt > does not absolutely require including an email address (if you give > some other contact method, such as postal address or telephone > number), and there are RFCs that don't include it (e.g RFC 3718 > from 2004; perhaps others exist, too).
There are also cases wheres where contacting the author would require somewhat unconventional methods, e.g. RFC 3542... What disturbs me as a reviewer is when a draft does not include email address(es) of authors or where comments should be sent. I'm having difficulty figuring out the usefulness of such a draft. FWIW, IMHO, any spam argument seems bogus. Anyone actively participating is already leaving such an email address footprint all over the net (including elsewhere in the IETF) that a) they already need protection mechanisms, and b) obfuscation methods (if used) should be reasonable. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
