Hi Keith,
--On September 16, 2011 10:10:06 AM -0400 Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com> wrote:
I think we need a low-overhead and relatively informal mechanism of
reporting errata and requesting clarifications, and maybe that it should
be expanded a bit to serve as an implementation and interoperability
reporting mechanism. But I don't think that having such a mechanism
requires us to maintain expertise in every subject matter area covered by
every RFC.
Again I would like to bring up the idea of every RFC having an associated
wiki page(s). The goal here is to provide a way for implementors to add
comments, annotations, clarifications, corrections etc to augment the RFCs.
Whilst such commentary can often be found on IETF mailing lists after an
RFC is published locating those and searching them can be tedious - plus
the full history of discussion on various points is often not relevant to
an implementor - all they need to know is what is the correct way to do it
now.
Doing something like this would obviously require some investment in
additional infrastructure. There are also questions about how we would
maintain the integrity of the information on the wiki pages, but I think
those are things we can easily address.
--
Cyrus Daboo
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf