Re: rfc-ed reference style [Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP]
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:01:54 +0200, Pekka Savola said: However, I'd strongly suggest adding some small amount of text to rationalize the editorial style, to avoid a thread like this occurring when people wonder whether the style is correct or not. Would a We prefer to follow style manual XYZ notation in the next 'guide to authors' document suffice? Or would you want We do this, consult XYZ for the details expository text? pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: rfc-ed reference style [Re: Last Call: Instructions to Requestfor Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP]
* * However, I'd strongly suggest adding some small amount of text to * rationalize the editorial style, to avoid a thread like this occurring * when people wonder whether the style is correct or not. * Pekka, There is a small amount of text about the reference style of RFCs in 2223bis. It says, There are many styles for references, and the RFCs have one of their own. I don't know that this rationalizes the style. In fact, the origin of the RFC reference style is lost in antiquity. I once queried Jon Postel about it, and his response was equivalent to Get used to it!. Anyway, the RFC reference style has been in use for a very long time, and the RFC Editor sees no compelling reason to change it. Others have pointed out that this is in fact one of the legitimate styles recognized by those who devote their lives to such issues. Let's not devote any more of OUR lives to this issue! Bob Braden
Re: Financial state of the IETF - to be presented Wednesday
Vint, Let me restate what I said at the open mike on Wednesday. I will reserve 8% or $1 USD, whichever is greater, per unit sold by my company for one year. At the end of that year I'll donate that money to the ISOC ear marked for the IETF. Its almost the same deal IMS/ISC offered had they gotten the .org bid. Be the change you wish to see. -rick On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, vinton g. cerf wrote: that would have to be a decision of PIR and its board - ISOC does not, at least as I understand it, have any direct access to the .org revenues. ISOC does select the PIR board but otherwise there is no financial connection. Vint At 12:08 PM 3/15/2003 -0800, Rick Wesson wrote: Harald, The short and sweet of it is: Unless we change something, our current funding methods won't pay for our current work. At the presentation, I'll ask the floor what they think about various ideas for improving the situation. At one point some of us tried to use the .org redelegation to help fund the IETF. [1] We didn't win but the ISOC's bid did win. Did the ISOC make the same commitment, could they divert some funding from .org domain registrations to support the IETF? It only seems like the right thing to do, at least it did to those of us who worked on the bid [2] So, couldn't the ISOC make the same commitment fund the IETF and IAB? -rick [1] http://trusted.resource.org/Support/ISOC/intent_to_donate.pdf [2] http://trusted.resource.org/ Vint Cerf SVP Architecture Technology WorldCom 22001 Loudoun County Parkway, F2-4115 Ashburn, VA 20147 703 886 1690 (v806 1690) 703 886 0047 fax
