Keith Moore writes:
if we had tried to sort out all of these issues, we'd have missed the
opportunity to use 2822 as an RFC number
It's cute to replace 822 with 2822. It's mind-bogglingly stupid to use
that cuteness as an excuse for ignoring issues. This is supposed to be
a helpful document for implementors, not an April Fool's RFC.
If you don't think that complicated decisions should delay publication
of simple decisions, you'll have to accept the idea of multiple specs,
each spec labelled as being only part of the picture.
---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago