On May 9, 2011, at 6:51 AM, Eric Burger wrote:

> Agreeing with John here re: it's just a bug.
> 
> IEEE Xplore regularly does "deals" (read: free) to add publishers to the 
> digital library. It is part of the network effect from their perspective: if 
> you are more likely to get a hit using their service, you are more likely to 
> use the service.
> 
> We (RFC Editor? IAOC? Me as an individual?) can approach IEEE to add the RFC 
> series to Xplore.

Or the IETF Trust could do this, as it falls squarely within the purpose of the 
Trust.

Regards
Marshall


> 
> On May 9, 2011, at 1:32 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> --On Sunday, May 08, 2011 15:06 -0700 Bob Braden
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I just discovered an astonishing example of misinformation,
>>> shall we say, in the IEEE electric power community. There is
>>> an IEEE standards document C37.118, entitled (you don't care)
>>> "IEEE Standard for Synchrophasors for Power Systems
>>> C37-118(TM)-2005", which is currently of great importance for
>>> the instrumentation of the national power grid. I just noticed
>>> that it references RFC 793, and for curiosity looked to see
>>> how it was referenced. I found:
>>> 
>>>   [B8] RFC 793-1981,Transmission Control Protocol DARPA
>>> Internet Program Protocol Specification.[12]
>>> ...
>>> Now, it has always been IETF's (and even before there was an
>>> IETF, Jon Postel's) policy to allow people to sell RFCs. What
>>> astonishes me is that clever people in the IEEE don't know
>>> RFCs are available free online. I guess RFCs remain so
>>> counter-cultural that industrial types don't get it. I wonder
>>> how many other IEEE standards contain similar RFC-for-pay
>>> references..
>> 
>> Bob,
>> 
>> What you presumably remember, but others reading this may not,
>> was just how many comments Jon made about the impossibility of
>> preventing fools from throwing their money away.  And, of
>> course, it is in the interest of Global Engineering Documents
>> --which, in the era in which few folks had direct access to the
>> Internet was one of the better sources for miscellaneous
>> technical standards documents-- to let people continue to
>> believe that they are a convenient and standard (sic) source.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --On Sunday, May 08, 2011 21:26 -0400 "John R. Levine"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> ...
>>> This isn't an enormous project, but it requires figuring out
>>> which online libraries are worth getting into, making the
>>> necessary arrangements with them (which may or may not involve
>>> money), a batch process to load in all the existing RFCs, and
>>> arrange with the production house to ensure that each new RFC
>>> gets listed as it's published.  Most of these systems include
>>> abstracts and forward and backward references, which will
>>> doubtless require some debugging to make them work reliably.
>>> 
>>> Like I said, it's a good project for the new RFC series
>>> editor.  It should be a lot easier than deciding how to put
>>> Chinese names into RFCs.
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> I do note, however, that RFCs appear to be listed in ACM's Guide
>> to Computing Literature (essentially part of the ACM Digital
>> Library at this stage).  Putting "Transmission Control Protocol"
>> into the search mechanism turns up RFC 793 in a hurry.  And,
>> behold, they have full text available and retrieving it works
>> without any charges other than the access fees for the Digital
>> Library itself.  "RFC Editor" is even on their list of
>> publishers for search purposes.  
>> 
>> The problem is that the titles they index do not contain the RFC
>> numbers, so looking up "RFC793" or "RFC 793".  That is not a
>> decision to avoid indexing the series (which would require the
>> process John outlines to reverse) but a bug.   I have filed a
>> bug report as Digital Library feedback.
>> 
>>   john
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to