ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC Editor RFP Review Request

2006-07-20 10:54:42
<inline>
Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Hansen" <tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com>
Cc: <iaoc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; <iad(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; 
<iab(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>;
<iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: RFC Editor RFP Review Request


I use ftp all the time to access the RFCs. I use direct web URLs all the
time to access the RFCs. I *occasionally* use rfc-editor.org's web
interface. I agree with Henrik.

I used to use ftp all the time to access the RFCs but then it stopped working
about two months ago and messages on this list, from others as well as me, and
to the relevant e-mail address have had no effect.

So I think that ftp MUST be in the RFP.  It is a technology that has proved its
worth and even if and when son of http comes along and provides us with a
different way of access, ftp will still have a role.

Tom Petch



Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com

Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
It may be that the level of detail specification should be less than
what it is now, overall; but with the current specification level I
felt it is a clear omission to not specify *any* access to the documents
except through a search facility.  I feel that direct ftp/http/rsync
access is actually more important than the search facility specified
in the proposed SOW, which is why I commented on this.


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


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