[rfc-i] Draft Review request - Pre-IETF RFCs Classifying Part I

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Mon Nov 29 07:43:34 PST 2010


At 4:51 PM +0200 11/29/10, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>28.11.2010 13:32, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>On 28.11.2010 12:18, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>>>...
>>>>RFCs are immutable. We can ask the RFC Editor to update the RFC
>>>>database, but the actual text in the RFCs is not going to change.
>>>It is considered. But are there any way to mark the RFC with the
>>
>>What do you mean by "it is considered"?
>It means that I know it. However I don't find any other way to mark RFC xxxx as <foo>, for instance.
>>
>>>corresponding
>>>'ST. of th. Memo' section without changing it? And what would you say about
>>
>>I don't think so. The information on the RFC reflects the situation at time of publication, not the current one. For that, there's the RFC database.
>But RFC 2026 has imperative rule: all RFCs are to be assigned as St. Tr. . . .

I don't see this rule in RFC 2026. In fact, it says the opposite. That is why I am asking what is your motivation. Please quote the part of RFC 2026 that is motivating you to do this work that (as far as I know) no one has felt was needed in the 14 years since RFC 2026 was published.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list