"Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" wrote:
Joe Touch wrote:
It is a paradox to begin one standard by selectively omitting
current standards (e.g., RFC1122).
I believe that that is called "making progress". Cited
from section 4.20 of RFC-1336:
"I think three factors contribute to the success of the
Internet:
1) public documentation of the protocols,
2) free (or cheap) software for the popular machines, and
3) vendor independence."
The unstated assumption of #1 is that there are protocols,
that they are designed carefully and conservatively to result
in a stable specification to code to.
Certainly protocols evolve and even are replaced. It's
more productive to replace a standard than ignore it, though.
Thus, it is not "end-to-end-purity" or because the existence
of any organization.
I asserted neither per se.
Speaking of keeping standards, I am wondering why STD-2
is still RFC-1700, although the current version is kept by
IANA at http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm .
Very good question. I'll be glad to raise the issue with IANA;
at least 1700 and STD-2 should be obsoleted in their current form.
Joe