[Top] [All Lists]

Re: rfc2821bis-01 Issue 17: all contination lines must use same code

2007-04-12 11:28:49

On Apr 11, 2007, at 11:19 AM, John C Klensin wrote:

If I understand the question, you are saying that an I-D
proposal can update and even go as far as change an RFC and my
"assumption" that it can not is an incorrect assumption?

An I-D cannot.

Just to be clear, an I-D can *propose* to change an RFC. If it's accepted as an RFC, then the new RFC is marked as updating the old RFC. It's not necessary to replace an RFC completely in order to change some detail in it.

For example, RFC 3501 -- IMAP4 -- obsoletes RFC 2060. We no longer recommend to read or implement 2060 at all, we recommend to read and implement RFC3501. This kind of replacement is what John is doing.

The other option is to update an older RFC. For example, RFC4466 (collected ABNF changes) updates RFC3501, and the RFC Index says so ( An implementor working on RFC3501 also has to read RFC4466 to see what has been changed. Sometimes extensions are forced to make changes in the protocol they're extending and these changes are registered as updates so people can tell.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>