At 13:16 17/12/2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
<flame>
HAVING THE IETF CONTINUE TO SAY ONE THING AND DO ANOTHER IS NOT A GOOD
THING FOR THE INTERNET.
</flame>
OK, finished shouting. Eric and Bob: the NEWTRK list is waiting for your
contribution on the principle involved, and your internet-draft suggesting
the change to RFC 2026 to get rules aligned with reality.
Great. This is a good statement and the first step ahead!
While updating RFC 2026, better also to make the second step and say that
"having the IETF continue to do one thing according to the RFCs and the
rest of the world doing something else is not a good thing either for the
Internet (what ever the "Internet" may then mean since IETF says it is the
adherence to its Internet documents).
Then may be someone will consider publishing the "Internet Book" were the
consequences of the valid standards and RFC would be maintained in an
orderly maner and translated into the various working languages of the
world. This would solve the obsolesence issue: if an RFC is not quoted in
the Internet Book and no one protests for one year or more, it becomes
historic.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf