Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
The only possible reason I can see for doing anything to the
status of RFC 1032 is becaue the existence of the RFC is
(wrongly) abused to try to force people into changing their
behaviour with the argument "The IETF says so".
Certainly not, just read <http://rfc-ignorant.org> and the
listing policy. It's a private service like abuse.net etc.
Those people should stop taking the name of the IETF in vain.
"Those people" are about as coherent as this list, and as
far as I know they never talk about the "IETF" (excl. me).
They discuss RfCs, mainly 2821 and 2142. Replacing 954 by
1032 last year, after 3912 obsoleted 954.
Status UNKNOWN seems like a fine status to keep
ACK, bye, Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf