[rfc-i] Fwd: Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3907)

SM sm at resistor.net
Sat Mar 8 21:49:09 PST 2014


Hi Martin,
At 21:09 04-03-2014, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 18:01:05 +0900
>
>I saw the announcement for the new RFC (7159). For the record, although
>I understand the basic idea behind the policy that RFCs are never
>changed, I think it would have been much wiser to just make the change
>in place.
>
>In the long run (in this case, my guess would be that this means more
>than one week), the implications would have been much smaller than
>having to live with two virtually identical RFCs with numbers differing
>only by 1 for a long time.

There was a discussion nearly a year ago about 
not changing a RFC once it has been 
published.  In deciding whether to depart from 
the basic idea it would have to determined 
whether RFCs form an archival series.

Regards,
-sm  



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list