Tom Petch wrote:
I note that this will also give us a URN (RFC3044).
What's the point of another URN in addition to urn:ietf:rfc:2648 ?
The ISSN idea is fine if this gets RFCs cataloged in places where
they are not available at the moment.
For the "info-handles" and DOI ideas I don't understand why the
IETF would wish to spend money for "yet another number" for RFCs.
See Henning's and Marshall's articles, $1500 per year. I'm not
at all convinced that this is a good idea.
IETF mailing list