[rfc-i] Using LaTeX & BibTeX to cite RFCs

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Thu Aug 27 17:57:36 PDT 2009

As for the institution, I think that depends on how the RFC became an 
RFC. Using an institution of IETF for RFC 31 seems odd as the IETF 
wasn't around then (IETF 1 was 1986). RFCs from the IRTF should say 
IRTF. RFCs from the IETF should say IETF. What would be more helpful 
would be to also have the status (Standard, Draft, Proposed, 
Experimental, Informational).

Regards,    Martin.

On 2009/08/28 4:16, RJ Atkinson wrote:
> I see some variations in the published literature in how RFCs
> are cited.  I've put together a 1 page PDF that illustrates
> some of the differences.  As PDF attachments can be large,
> I'm using a URL for access to the PDF:
>     <http://www.petri-meat.com/rja/example.pdf>
> I'm wondering if there is a preferred practice in these areas.
> If there isn't, ought there be a preferred practice ?
> Thanks,
> Ran
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

#-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp   mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list