[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-shafranovich-feedback-report-01.txt

2005-05-26 06:44:40

On 5/25/05, ned+ietf-822(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com 
<ned+ietf-822(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com> wrote:
   o References are normally unnumbered sections.

Can you provide a reasoning for this or is this simply something the
community is used to?

It is what the RFC Editor requires. Adopting the format of the final RFC 
rather than later often saves time.

The RFC Editor has explicitly said that they don't have a position on
numbered or unnumbered references sections.  RFC2223bis itself is not
consistent on this topic; when it mentions splitting
normative/informative it talks about sections s and s+1, but 2223bis
itself doesn't use numbered sections.

Looking at the 161 RFCs since RFC3900, 150 of them seem to have
'normative references' sections; 142 of them are numbered and 8 are

forbin% grep -li '^[0-9][0-9.]* *normative references' rfc39??.txt
rfc4???.txt  | wc -l
forbin% grep -li '^ *normative references' rfc39??.txt rfc4???.txt  | wc -l