Eliot,
Thank you for your reply. The sentence has been updated as follows. Please let
us know any further updates:
The authors greatly appreciate the work of Glenn S. Fowler, who was
part of the team that created the FNV algorithm.
In context (please refresh):
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.html#name-acknowledgements
In addition, a single space has been removed from each of two lines that were
too long for the line-length limitation when creating the text file. Please let
us know if you prefer a different solution. They changes are visible here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-lastrfcdiff.html
Thank you.
Alice Russo
RFC Production Center
> On Feb 12, 2026, at 6:18 PM, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I appreciate that we want to honor Mr. Fowler, but because he hasn't really
> been involved in the development of this draft, I don't think we can infer
> that he would want to be listed as an author. With that in mind, I would
> like to wordsmith the text below to more clearly indicate his contribution
> (e.g., he was part of the team that created the FNV algorithm).
> Eliot
> On 12.02.2026 23:12, Alice Russo wrote:
>> Donald, Eliot,
>>
>> From your replies, it sounds like the conclusion is to move G. Fowler from
>> the author list to the Acknowledgements. We have done so and have added a
>> sentence as follows; please let us know any further updates.
>>
>> Significant contributions were made by Glenn S. Fowler.
>>
>> Alternatively:
>> Eliot, for your awareness, there exists an option where you (as stream
>> manager) approve the document in place of the missing author -- and they
>> remain listed as an author (i.e., their name remains in the document
>> header). This is option 3 here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/#missingauthor
>> This option might be appealing because the algorithm's name is from the
>> authors' surnames, as Donald pointed out.
>>
>> The revised files are here (please refresh):
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.html
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.txt
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.pdf
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.xml
>>
>> This diff file shows all changes from the approved I-D:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-diff.html
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>
>> This diff file shows the changes made during AUTH48 thus far:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-auth48diff.html
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>
>> This diff file shows only the changes since the last posted version:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-lastrfcdiff.html
>>
>> We will wait to hear from you again before continuing the
>> publication process. This page shows the AUTH48 status of
>> your document:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9923
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Alice Russo
>> RFC Production Center
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 8, 2026, at 12:19 PM, Donald Eastlake <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Eliot,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 8, 2026 at 10:59 AM Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot
>>> Lear) <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> It's time to move on. Generally it's bad form to publish a document
>>>> without the approval of a co-author, and I would not like to break that
>>>> precedent (there are exceptions, like if someone has died and next of kin
>>>> agrees- as you know this has happened once or twice). What happens next
>>>> depends on Mr. Fowler's contribution:
>>>>
>>>> If he contributed substantial amounts of text outside of the code, then I
>>>> would want a single editor listed and all others moved to a contributors
>>>> section. An explicit statement that Mr. Fowler could not be reached to
>>>> approve this publication should be mentioned.
>>>>
>>> I wrote most of the text although initially much of it was adapted
>>> from the FNV website which was, I believe, primarily written by
>>> Landon. As additional material was repeatedly added to respond to
>>> various comments and requests, the percentage of the text that was
>>> material adapted from the website declined. The order of the first
>>> three front page authors is alphabetic which is the order the first
>>> letters of their family names appear in "FNV".
>>>
>>>
>>>> Assuming that the code snippets are based on the Github Repo code from
>>>> lcn2, then there are no licensing issues, and an appropriate
>>>> acknowledgment is sufficient. Otherwise, I'd like to be clear as to the
>>>> code's origin.
>>>>
>>> I assume you are talking about the C code rather than the few lines of
>>> pseudo-code. The C code was written by myself and Tony Hansen who have
>>> both approved the draft. None of it is from Github.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If Mr. Fowler contributed only to the algorithm, and not to the code, then
>>>> an appropriate acknowledgment is sufficient.
>>>>
>>> I believe that to be the case.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Even at this late date, if Mr. Fowler approves, I am happy to also
>>>> approve. But that has to happen PRONTO.
>>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Donald
>>> ===============================
>>> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>>> 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Eliot
>>>>
>>>> On 04.02.2026 03:30, Karen Moore wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Phong,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your reply. We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status
>>>> page for this document (https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9923).
>>>>
>>>> We now await Glenn’s approval as well as the final ISE approval of the
>>>> document from Eliot.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Karen Moore
>>>> RFC Production Center
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 3, 2026, at 2:09 PM, Phong Vo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi, I have reviewed draft RFC 9923 and approved it.
>>>> Phong Vo
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2026 at 7:40 AM Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Dear Mssrs Fowler and Vo
>>>> The RFC Editor has requested your review and approval of draft RFC 9923.
>>>> All authors must approve this work. If you do not wish to be listed as an
>>>> author, you may reply to this message saying so, in which case I will work
>>>> with the RFC Production Center team to make appropriate edits so that you
>>>> are still credited with work, but as contributors.
>>>> Otherwise, please take a little while to review each of text, html, and
>>>> PDF the files below and indicate your approval or what changes you would
>>>> like to see. A lot of work has gone into getting the document to a
>>>> publishable state. It's time to finish the job.
>>>> Thanks much for your prompt attention to this matter.
>>>> Eliot Lear
>>>> Independent Submissions Editor
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.txt
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.pdf
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.html
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923.xml
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-diff.html
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-auth48diff.html
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by
>>>> side)
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-lastdiff.html
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-lastrfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>>>
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-xmldiff1.html
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9923-xmldiff2.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
--
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
