Valery Smyslov <smyslov.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I wonder about keeping more of the original authors on the new
>> document, since it is substantively the same document. I can not
>> judge what their contribution was to the original document, nor do I
>> know if they were asked. If the design team has gone through this
>> consideration, then that's enough for me.
> All three original authors were asked to co-author the draft. Tommy
> agreed, but no reply was received from Samy and Ravi. I cannot judge
> their contribution to the original rfc, but I think that it's a good
> idea to add them to acknowledgement section anyway. Will do this.
Glad to hear you had that discussion. My issue is closed :-)
Please consider using the xml-v3 contributor mechanism.
If you are using Kramdown, then it's just like the author: section, but you
say "contributor:"
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
