RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML)

It's good that protocols needing more than 72 ASCII characters are 
forbidden.


Just imagine what elegantly simple protocols we would have
if we required the descriptions to be in Morse code.

Y(J)S

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), (continued) Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Marshall Eubanks Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Bob Braden Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Ted Faber RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Hallam-Baker, Phillip RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Bob Braden RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Hallam-Baker, Phillip Re: Diagrams, Frank Ellermann RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Gray, Eric Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Stewart Bryant RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Gray, Eric RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Yaakov Stein <= Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Masataka Ohta Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Marshall Eubanks RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Hallam-Baker, Phillip Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Steve Crocker Re: Diagrams, Frank Ellermann Re: Diagrams, Harald Tveit Alvestrand Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Cameron Kerr RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Gray, Eric RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Gray, Eric RE: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML), Hallam-Baker, Phillip