Re: musings

braden@isi.edu Fri, 17 May 1996 00:34 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa28543; 16 May 96 20:34 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa28539; 16 May 96 20:34 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06907; 16 May 96 20:34 EDT
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA15106>; Thu, 16 May 1996 17:04:15 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA15100>; Thu, 16 May 1996 17:04:14 -0700
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA25275>; Thu, 16 May 1996 17:04:13 -0700
Received: from can.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA15096>; Thu, 16 May 1996 17:04:13 -0700
Date: Thu, 16 May 96 17:04:11 PDT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: braden@isi.edu
Posted-Date: Thu, 16 May 96 17:04:11 PDT
Message-Id: <9605170004.AA25767@can.isi.edu>
Received: by can.isi.edu (4.1/4.0.3-6) id <AA25767>; Thu, 16 May 96 17:04:11 PDT
To: billw@cisco.com, craig@aland.bbn.com
Subject: Re: musings
Cc: fred@cisco.com, kre@munnari.oz.au, rreq@isi.edu
X-Orig-Sender: owner-rreq@isi.edu
Precedence: bulk

 
  *> 
  *> Another note about RFC 1122/23 and this BCP idea for rreq.  RFC 1122/23
  *> *amended* the standards.  They're the documents that, for instance, are
  *> the standards that say use slow start etc.  So BCP wouldn't be right
  *> for RFC 1122/23 and, I believe, wouldn't be right for rreq either.
  *> 
  *> Craig
  *> 

Craig,

It would not be a difficult exercise to construct a standards-track
document that simply compiled the amendments from 1122/23, and let the
document as a whole be a BCP.  There were not very many amendments,
and I think they were clearly indicated.

Bob