Subject: Re: Proposal to deal with archiving of I-Ds

From: "J. Noel Chiappa" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:05:14 -0400

> From: "Eliot Lear" <[email-masked]>

    > I'm interested in putting something in front of a trade press person
    > that they cannot ignore. Perhaps the watermark should simply be
    > "REJECTED or EXPIRED".

Somehow I doubt this will work. Nobody's going to try to scam a trade press
person with an old I-D; they'll just file a new one (it's not exactly hard,
right?) and use that.

No, the only cure for the trade press issue is to help educate them - and
although almost all of the trade press people I've met have been fairly
quick on the uptake, the problem is that we seem to be getting new ones all
the time, so there is the inevitable learning cycle...

	Noel

---

From: Lloyd Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:00:54 +0100 (BST)

> the time, so there is the inevitable learning cycle...

Does anyone consider the learning cycle of new IETFers?

L.

<[email-masked]>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:30:03 -0400

> person with an old I-D; they'll just file a new one (it's not exactly hard,

nah.  they'll just tell the trade press person that the proposal was submitted
to IETF.  as far as I can tell, in about half of the cases where someone
tells the press that, there really is nothing resembling such a proposal.