an example - RFC 2149 7 Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge Grenville Armitage (Bellcore) for reviewing the document and suggesting improvements towards simplifying the multiple MCS functionalities. Discussion with Joel Halpern (Newbridge) helped clarify the multiple MCS problem. Anthony Gallo (IBM RTP) pointed out security issues that are not adequately addressed in the current document. Arvind Murching (Microsoft) flagged a potential show stopper in section 4.1.2. (there are rather many more) > On Jun 8, 2026, at 7:35 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2026 at 5:35 PM Scott Bradner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Jun 7, 2026, at 7:52 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 1. This text is purely about contributors duty to the IETF, not about what > > appears in RFCs. It's entirely consistent with this text for an RFC to > > contain no acknowledgements of any names besides the author, even if all > > the work is from others. So, at most this would require indivian example - > > RFC 21duals to identify AI assistance at the time of contribution. > > huh > > the rule says "The Contribution properly acknowledges all Contributors" - i.e > text in the contribution lists the contributors - unless the text is remove > it would > appear in the RFC (and this editor of the rule expects that to be the case) > > I think this is overreading the text quite a bit, but perhaps it would be > more useful to try a worked example. For example, RFC 5378 itself > has the following acknowledgement: The editors would like to acknowledge the > help the IETF IPR Working > Group provided during the development of the document. > I take it you believe that this is an acceptable acknowledgement, even > though it does not list any person by name? What level of contribution > do you believe would require someone to be named individually? > > -Ekr > > -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
