On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:37:23 +0100
"Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony(_at_)atkielski(_dot_)com> wrote:
Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu writes:
Linux could at least stand on the claim that it was implementing
the RFCs as written, and that the interoperability problem was
due to the other end failing to implement the RFCs.
The RFCs are not specific enough to support such a claim.
So what purpose do RFCs serve if they aren't specific enough to be complied
with ? I'm intrigued to find out what you think they are for.