Re: An Internet Draft as reference material
2000-09-22 11:30:03
I want to second Bob Braden's pithy observation re I-Ds. If they
make it through the process and become RFCs (including informational
RFCs) then they clearly merit retention and they achieve it, since
RFcs are archival. However, many I-Ds do not make it through the
process and to archive them may seem to elevate them to a status that
they have not merited. I don't mean to suggest that these documents
have not value. The next author of a book on the history of IETF
standards would certainly find them of great value. But, I don't want
to see them cited in some product marketing data sheet, further
confusing folks who already are confused by the fact that all
standards are RFCs, but not all RFCs are standards ...
Steve
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, (continued)
Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, hardie
Re: An Internet Draft as reference material,
Stephen Kent <=
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Pete Loshin
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Stephen Kent
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Greg Minshall
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, RJ Atkinson
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Randy Bush
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Pete Loshin
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Joe Touch
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Keith Moore
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Randy Bush
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material, Greg Minshall
|
|
|