I would rather pay $1 to provide bigger, better cookies or tap-dancing penguins during the plenaries. I see no value in doing this and in fact plenty of reasons to oppose it. Where is the $1500 of value to the IETF here? I can see the value to DOI. If the IETF were to go this route it should be expecting DOI to be paying a cut of the additional business generated, not to hand money over.
________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Marshall Eubanks Sent: Thu 22/05/2008 9:10 AM To: Henning Schulzrinne Cc: Working Group Chairs; IAB; IETF Discussion; IAOC; Bill Manning; John C Klensin; RFC Editor Subject: Re: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration On May 22, 2008, at 8:23 AM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote: > On a side note: If we want something URN-like that actually has > traction outside the IETF, DOIs seem like the right approach. See > http://www.doi.org/ > Articles in our closest technical disciplines, namely those > published by ACM and IEEE, already have DOIs, both for journal and > conference articles. > Note that DOI is a registered URI within the info-URI namespace (IETF RFC 4452, the "info" URI Scheme for Information Assets with Identifiers in Public Namespaces). Further information is available at http://info-uri.info <http://info-uri.info/> . These are not free; if we got DOI's for all RFCs through, e.g., Bowker, it would cost Up to 9999 DOIs - $1500 per year I think it would be a good idea. A $ 1 increase in registration fees would more than pay for it. Regards Marshall > This is obviously completely orthogonal to the ISSN issue. > > Henning > _______________________________________________ > IETF mailing list > IETF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
