Re: The RFC 20 rationale (was: Re: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a B

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 01:01:05PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
> --On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 10:52 -0500 Nico Williams
> <nico(_at_)cryptonector(_dot_)com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 03:34:19PM +0200, Harald Alvestrand
> > wrote:
> > > RFC numbers are cheap. (The debate required to agree on the
> > > text may not be.)
> > And the labor to edit new RFCs is also not cheap.  We could
> > have produced a modern replacement for RFC 20.
> But, Nico, what do you mean by a "modern replacement"?  The
Modern formatting.  Nothing else.