[rfc-i] Fixing names in references to old RFCs

Martin J. Dürst duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Wed Feb 17 22:27:25 PST 2021

Hello Andy,

On 18/02/2021 14:15, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> Martin,
> If we positively know that the name was mangled, then we should use the
> correct name in references. And we should also make sure that an errata has
> been filed, and all metadata regarding the RFC has the correct name.

That's an interesting idea, but the RFC Editor and the Production Center 
would probably have to say whether they are willing to support this. I'd 
definitely be willing to help a bit.

> Just out of curiosity, did this RFC precede the AUTH48 process?

Probably not. What RFC 7997 is referring to is the use of non-ASCII. So 
this isn't about simple spelling errors that could and should have been 
caught in AUTH48, but about authors where the Production Center would 
have refused to use the fully correct name (e.g. Dürst in my case) and 
insisted on an alternative (Duerst in my case).

Regards,   Martin.

> Cheers,
> Andy
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 11:58 PM Martin Thomson <mt at lowentropy.net> wrote:
>> With RFC 7997, we can now include people's names in RFCs.
>> But we didn't used to.  I have a document that cites an older RFC where
>> one of the authors had their name mangled.  What do people here think about
>> correcting the mangling when referencing that document from a newer RFC?
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list