"John W. Noerenberg II" <jwn2(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com> writes:
At 9:38 AM -0700 10/24/03, Bob Braden wrote:
suppose a specification was
developed by an individual or organization outside the IETF process,
but published as an Informational RFC. That often happens, in fact.
Suppose that the IETF then takes this specification into the standards
track, resulting in publication of a new version of the spec as a
Proposed Standard. The PS will obsolete the Informational RFC.
You raise a good point I hadn't considered. However, my original
question is still unanswered:
"Can the WG chair request the Editor amend 2440 with the note that it
Obsoletes 1991?"
It's not worth our time to worry about 2440. We can add the text to
2440bis and do it then.
Jon: I believe a simple "Obsoletes: 1991, 2440" is sufficient in the
document header on the first page.
Derek, I apologize for not doing so earlier, but I'll send you the
note which originated this discussion. To show how out-of-touch I've
become I didn't discover until today that you'd agreed to take on the
job WG Chair after I asked to step down.
No need for you to appologize, John. The person who should really be
appologizing is Alfred who completely mis-addressed his original
email.
-derek
--
Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
derek(_at_)ihtfp(_dot_)com www.ihtfp.com
Computer and Internet Security Consultant