Two additional observations:
(1) While we think of RFCs as online documents, their
antecedents, and all of the early ones, were paper publications.
[elided]
I suggest that the community would be better served, and the ISSN
made more useful, if we treated RFCs as "authoritative paper,
copies available online" rather than "online documents". If
that requires the RFC Editor or IASA to print out all of the
RFCs published in a given month, throw them into an envelope,
and put the envelope into the smail, I imagine we can afford
that.
there is historical precident for this.
my question earlier, regarding the whole series,
includes early, paper-only RFC's, historic, etc.
so the folks thinking that a simple change in the
current tools set will make it all good might have
overlooked dealing w/ legacy documents.
there are also books already published that are RFC
compilations. they already have ISSN numbers.
john
--
--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf