On Apr 7, 2013, at 6:41 PM, Måns Nilsson <mansaxel(_at_)besserwisser(_dot_)org>
wrote:
Subject: RE: [IETF] Comments for Humorous RFCs or uncategorised RFCs or
dated?April the first Date: Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:59:30AM +0000 Quoting
Yoav Nir (ynir(_at_)checkpoint(_dot_)com):
I mostly share the sentiment that this is just humor, so what's the harm.
That said, I did at one point have to exercise my diplomatic skills when I
got forwarded a customer (nameless here for evermore) question about whether
support for RFC 3514 was on our roadmap.
On that subject, April 1 RFCen in call for tender, I'd argue that they
serve a purpose. If an April 1 RFC is included in MUST or SHOULD --
a clued supplier will have staff that get the joke and reply with "only
on April 1" or similar. A box-ticking "let's hope they don't test this"
lying bastard will just check it and pull their pants down in public.
In this case I could tick that box without being a lying bastard. Just a
sort-of deceitful one. It is possible to configure the firewall to drop packets
with the evil bit set. I still went with explaining the April 1 RFC concept.