[rfc-i] streams in rfc-index

Martin J. Dürst duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Tue Nov 3 04:47:55 PST 2015

On 2015/11/03 14:26, Scott Bradner wrote:

> use of the term Legacy in this sort of case does not seem quite right - that term seems best to be used for
> pre-IETF documents as well as documents that were not last called & approved by the IESG

On top of what Scott says, I don't feel the term 'legacy' would be a 
very good choice for documents that were still in force, independent of 
who approved them. I don't know whether there are any such documents, 
though (not an IETF historian, sorry).

Regards,  Martin.

> there is the question of what Area to use for this type of document that the IESG approved but was not the
> product of a working group (there are quite a few documents that fall into this category) - maybe (Stream: IETF, Area: Independent)
> I can do a pass to try to find these cases if the confusion is that chasing the label away from Legacy is what is wanted
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> .

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list