[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.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list