[rfc-i] Illustrations, graphics, and normative-ness

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Thu Apr 26 08:05:25 PDT 2012

On Apr 26, 2012, at 2:05 AM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:

> Observing that there is a trend of authors and readers of RFCs towards less and less native English speakers the utility of an illustration should not be underestimated. While not normative, illustrations might help preventing misinterpretations.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I have been assuming up to this point that we were talking about illustrations and graphics as normative parts of the RFC. It sounds like I made a bad assumption.

RFC 5996, a standards-track document, has this:

   The initial exchanges are as follows:

   Initiator                         Responder
   HDR, SAi1, KEi, Ni  -->
. . .
                                <--  HDR, SAr1, KEr, Nr, [CERTREQ]

I consider that illustration to be normative. If I update the document in the future when there is a non-text graphics format so that this appears with solid lines and arrows, I would expect graphic to be normative.

Do others agree? Disagree?

--Paul Hoffman

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list