[rfc-i] Valid email addresses [last call "On Authors, Contributors, Editors, and overload."]
hlflanagan at gmail.com
Tue Jan 10 12:36:42 PST 2012
On 1/10/12 12:14 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2012, at 12:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> Maybe this is a side issue, but I am aware of a quite recent case
>> where an author insisted on listing an obsolete email address in
>> an RFC, because it was his address at the former employer where
>> he did the work.
>> We know that email addresses are not for ever, but should there be
>> a default policy requiring a valid address at the date of publication?
> Good point, and it is not just email. Should the policy be that the
> stated affiliation be valid at the time of publication, regardless
> of what the affiliation was during the document development?
(removing RSE hat for a moment)
Requiring current affiliation makes me twitch a bit. If Joe Smith does
his work on an RFC as part of his employment contract with Cisco, and
then during the AUTH48 process goes to work for Juniper, putting Joe
Smith, senior engineer at Juniper as the affiliation seems very bad
form. That said, I think it is the author's call, and he and his
previous employer can discuss any breach of contract.
More information about the rfc-interest