Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 02 January 2015 17:10 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07271A1B89 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jan 2015 09:10:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.233
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.233 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y0DuIsIZ-Hvq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jan 2015 09:10:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EA41A1B81 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jan 2015 09:10:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0541C31805C; Fri, 2 Jan 2015 09:10:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=axXq4/TRbFCx02 bapaa0g5SueRc=; b=h4RfcNTPvDVjlQP1BzmtDJ8bjjIrHLVmOnn46MCn4buwtu KYZ54ww9v1dz0+yTwJG2cs9EItxR894F3gu2zjIdycE83bXLgZUSEZIVyD5c30g3 AbxxxzdFGkJnw6SN/U0r8IQrItdAYRX+QFgjSeurSJp8InIC3e0KbxXj4yOLs=
Received: from localhost (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a89.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8CE88318059; Fri, 2 Jan 2015 09:10:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2015 11:10:51 -0600
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices
Message-ID: <20150102171047.GX24442@localhost>
References: <54A45EA8.2020408@dial.pipex.com> <54A69B1E.60903@gmx.de> <631B2422-3C00-46CC-9D10-E3AED644683C@tzi.org> <EA211F2E8783F1180D89E83D@P5>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <EA211F2E8783F1180D89E83D@P5>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/8jEhXcniB_yjvLU4d2ECNVhg5JA
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, IETF Discussion List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:10:53 -0000

On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 11:04:55AM -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
> Let's just recognize that making rules retroactive to a 40+ year
> old spec is not likely to be fruitful.  [...]

+1.  Especially given how useful RFC 20 is.

Let's demonstrate agility and pragmatism here.  Promote RFC 20 after a
small effort to ascertain the RFC-Editor's current electronic version's
faithfulness to such "original" paper copies as might be found.  Or even
*without* such an effort: publish any errors found later as errata and
call it a day.

Nico
--