Re: RFC Errata: when to file, and when not to

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Thu, 09 August 2012 11:01 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC6CA21F8665 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 04:01:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.584
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CZpWE3G7wmjJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 04:01:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABFF21F8661 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 04:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.115] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1SzQO7-000OQB-EA; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 06:54:47 -0400
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 07:00:44 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>, "t.p." <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: RFC Errata: when to file, and when not to
Message-ID: <5256BF9BC9AE13013F066C4E@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzzsf6veDR+uwxnMw4Koh0Kj7FqoQpsUbENMb_r3v0G89A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALaySJKV96tdXhzfPD1e1Mro_+gp5aDarF7Z06QrA+iQtnHkLw@mail.gmail.com> <501A5656.2050407@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <501BEC0D.1060404@tana.it> <009101cd7476$bb522c20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <599B1629-543A-49BC-A0E7-FA2096C538AD@checkpoint.com> <03e701cd749f$73891c40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <50229D32.8000605@tana.it> <006701cd7606$17ff48a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <CAKHUCzzsf6veDR+uwxnMw4Koh0Kj7FqoQpsUbENMb_r3v0G89A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 11:01:01 -0000

--On Thursday, August 09, 2012 09:27 +0100 Dave Cridland
<dave@cridland.net> wrote:

> Does anyone other than historians honestly care what the
> original was? I mean, really?

Dave,

RFCs are often incorporated by reference in procurement
documents and conformity requirements.  If one were trying to
interpret or enforce such a requirement, it would almost
certainly be useful to know _exactly_ what version of an RFC and
its interpretations was agreed to.

   john