[rfc-i] DOIs and RFCs

Eggert, Lars lars at netapp.com
Tue Feb 11 23:40:18 PST 2014


On 2014-2-11, at 23:56, Joe Touch <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
> I don't see the benefit in creating another level of indirection for RFCs. We already have the rfc-editor URL as a way to identify them; citing them using an additional level of indirection through a separate service that may or may not be around in 20 years seems to be of no particular benefit and a lot of potential harm. E.g., the ACM Digital Library should link to the rfc-editor URL, which avoids dependence on DOI URL redirection.
> I similarly don't think its useful to include DOIs as part of citations.

the main reason I have heard for DOIs is that some universities (e.g., some in the UK) do not count anything that doesn't have a DOI when evaluating the output of their professors and researchers. For those folks, having DOIs assigned to RFCs would be extremely valuable, and doing so may in fact attract more participation from academics, which IMO can only be good.

Yes, the university departments are stupid to have this DOI requirement. But if we can make the problem go away by throwing a small amount of money at it, I'm all for it. IIRC this will be way cheaper that the bottled water for a single IETF meeting.

(I agree with you that we don't need the referencing system provided by DOIs, or that they are useful to include in citations.)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 273 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20140212/2a19cd10/attachment.sig>

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list