[rfc-i] An arbitrary example

Frank Ellermann hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz at gmail.com
Mon Nov 7 13:43:59 PST 2011

On 7 November 2011 21:08, SM wrote:

> According to www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc822 the
> status of RFC 822 is "STANDARD" (STD 11)

So far it's clear, nobody can silently kill a STD
without producing its successor at the same level.

> it is obsoleted by RFC 2822

Also clear, to get a successor something has to
start at PS, and RFC 2822 did that.

> I looked up RFC 2822 at
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2822 and I found
> that it is obsoleted by RFC 5322

Still clear, second step in the three maturity levels

> RFC 2822 is a PROPOSED STANDARD in the IETF Stream.

That is misleading, RFC 2822 should be "historic"
or something, it was completely replaced by RFC 5322.

In theory a PS could be promoted to DS without a new
RFC, but that didn't happen for RFC 2822.  And I'm
not aware of any examples, all "better than PS" RFCs
I care about got their own RFC number, fixing errata
in the PS.  (There was only one RFC 2822 erratum, so
that was a near miss.)

Maybe the new IESG "historic" rules mean that we are
encouraged to find and report such oddities, i.e.,
RFC 2821 + 2822 should be stamped as "historic" RFCs
to minimize the confusion of innocent bystanders.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list