[rfc-i] Fwd: Pre-IETF RFCs to Historic (not really proposing)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Fri Sep 16 12:11:39 PDT 2011

On 9/16/11 1:09 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> On 9/16/2011 11:43 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
>>>    "your email address has been updated to {xxx} for any future
>>> automated mail regarding errata in RFCs that you authored"
>>> I was impressed to see the scope of the change, across "all" RFCs,
>>> but didn't ask for details.
>>> One can easily imagine making this more automated, although that
>>> would introduce some significant security issues.
>> Well, yes. The simplistic approach would be to provide author at ietf.org
>> email aliases that would forward to the current address. Or not...
> ouch.
> Yes, that's the most general and well-established mechanism.  It's also
> a strategic change, adding a long-term service that could be costly.
> The specific requirement was for archive-related address updating.  That
> is, RFCs.  Your suggestion would be far more general.  It's such a clean
> solution, it's pretty appealing.
> However I worry about costs for maintenance and operations costs. 
> Aliasing services provided in scale have their own headaches.
> mumble.

Plus one wonders about people pushing to get an RFC published just so
they can obtain a coveted @ietf.org email address.

Or maybe not. :)


Peter Saint-Andre

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list