[rfc-i] Classifying pre-IETF RFCs

Mykyta Yevstifeyev evnikita2 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 1 07:14:19 PST 2010


01.12.2010 17:04, Joe Touch wrote:
>
>
> On 12/1/2010 6:59 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> 01.12.2010 16:48, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> Hi, Mykyta,
>>>
>>> On 12/1/2010 1:21 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> To my mind, if RFC Database reflects the status of RFC at the
>>>> moment of publishing, RFC 1000 is OK for classifying pre-1310
>>>> RFCs (as RFC 1310 make the classifying system 'modern').
>>>
>>> You should consider that RFC 1000 was NOT published at the time RFCs 1
>>> through 999 were published. I.e., if you agree that "status at the
>>> time published" is the right rule, then you MUST ignore RFC 1000's
>>> summary of it's informal organization of RFCs 1-999.
> >
>> RFC 1000 is only listing RFCs 1-999 and mentioning their categories.
>> However not all RFCs 1-999 contain the category itself.
>
> That's because RFC 1000 - or RFC 100 (as below), doesn't set that sort 
> of categorization up.
>
> These RFCs say "this is how this RFC helps categorize what's been 
> published", not "and authors should indicate what category their doc 
> should be in when they publish them".
>
> I.e., these are roadmap docs. Roadmap docs do not create streams.
>
>>> And RFC1000 did not proscribe any classification of later RFCs, so no,
>>> it's not appropriate to apply it to pre-1310 either.
>>>
>>> These ~1300 RFCs were not classified when published.
> >
>> No, they were. Look at RFC 100, which is a summary of RFCs 1-99, and
>> then RFC 1000, which is summary of RFCs 1-999. The had almost similar
>> classifying system. A part of these RFCs (1-999) contain category in
>> accordance with RFC1000. Why not all? - at the time they were published,
>> there were no exact requirements to RFCs.
>
> Exactly.
>
>>> Let's not rewrite history.
>
> In specific, if such labeling was optional, then it was.
>
> I.e., if you want to publish an RFC that categorizes all RFCs before 
> 1310, or all RFCs, or all prime-number-RFCs, fine.
>
> But that doesn't create an entry in the index with that label. THAT is 
> rewriting history.
>
> Joe
>
>
You and others have convinced me that early RFCs does not require any 
classifying. Let's close this topic now.

Mykyta Yevstifeyev


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list