[rfc-i] Classifying pre-IETF RFCs

Andrew G. Malis agmalis at gmail.com
Tue Nov 30 08:32:37 PST 2010

As an author of several pre-IETF RFCs, I would not mind if they were
labeled Historic.


On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Joe Touch <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
> On 11/30/2010 8:19 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> Some notes about pre-IETF RFCs classifying.
>> Now I agree that early RFCs does not need modern
>> classification. However I think it would be acceptable
>> if we mark them in accordance with RFC1000 (but
>> if they have RFC2026 category, they will remain it
>> while getting the RFC1000 status).
>> What do you think about this?
> I think RFC1000 exists, which is fine. A new RFC could provide a different
> view of those first 1000 RFCs, or pre-2026 RFCs as a whole. There could be
> many such roadmaps, and they need not agree.
> Regardless, though, these are just roadmap docs, NOT labels that belong in
> an index - largely because they are post-facto organizations, not a-priori
> tracks decided by the community or the authors at the time they were
> submitted.
> Joe
> _______________________________________________
> 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