IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] [Rsoc] RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Mon, 02 November 2020 19:31 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 784713A0B68; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com
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 uzFTk4TbJzyP; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A556C3A0B67; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18604F4070D; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B55A4F4070C for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yOdzNB63zoTm for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0940F4070D for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:31:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unescapeable.local ([47.186.30.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 0A2JVGBn029086 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:31:16 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1604345478; bh=WoyfZ21EVv4JelzYrJHFHT+p7V40k7IOv6vjI+9FY6Q=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=TTjUAovD3HhbkCLTRBqF7z3VGebmMQnEnAnIfSxAxRXHsrCf+Ae7QQZe1ZdztHwX3 qC+idT60CqGewU7D0+fp4jXkJd0D0hKK+btgOrdSgyvLcJx1lwL7E6LYPKgPIS2rAS KXahwFAHs/mTEiDMslgRPl4WXJbPS9bv0JiYi5ic=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.30.41] claimed to be unescapeable.local
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
References: <20201026181442.GA2438@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CAKq15ve-kAFZWH_f7=1XXC5PfxvO-sAzppB1fVTyqUufLftkVg@mail.gmail.com> <D2DB703DBF2A44A19B8F80DD@PSB> <CAKq15vdFVkG6_grNtqUqq-yDwj9QQcHJFZB5+RB-8fdxQXhFSw@mail.gmail.com> <fa36e919-b1a0-5b3c-9b42-54c6fdaadfb@iecc.com> <e8554ea2-1849-279f-733d-5798de8817b9@gmail.com> <26d1ff54-777f-884b-e35-d91e9fe59662@iecc.com> <00a1fc15-7559-96c6-7cd7-3ae5afd62237@gmail.com> <a34f219b-7c76-4b48-4844-5af3cd4f344@iecc.com> <be8dce95-2b4c-52c8-7eda-8a9b127a6dd4@gmail.com> <cdc14c1-54c9-5273-584c-ddb656912952@iecc.com> <5F9FDB7E.1080805@btconnect.com> <ae44e31b-964a-7901-4883-72abb0dbb8d3@gmx.de> <5F9FF8EA.9020809@btconnect.com> <bfa63584-1f49-1370-65d0-a217dcc4dbc5@gmx.de> <e530ccdc-6587-13dd-df51-29fc0c0b2fcd@nostrum.com> <752c6c5d-eab0-966f-141f-a7d402fdf4fe@gmx.de> <61673811-f47f-7122-2260-527bdec591d6@nostrum.com> <fb102886-22b1-f92e-bac8-336f4e74316d@gmx.de> <4F047A7E-F225-43E7-B357-89D2E506812A@tzi.org>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <bf72e302-eca9-18d6-dd1d-5a0bfd223996@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 13:31:16 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F047A7E-F225-43E7-B357-89D2E506812A@tzi.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [Rsoc] RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On 11/2/20 1:23 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 2020-11-02, at 19:29, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> IMHO, publishing large blobs of source code as-is is weird. We publish
>> specs for *readers*, not for automatic processing. Is this specific to
>> the YANG community, or does it apply to other areas as well?
> Much weirder, but not benefitting from page numbers:
> RFC 6716 appendix A.3

Ugh. To make sure we don't conflate "need to convey a bit exact and long 
message" with whether what 6716 did with that appendix was a good idea...

There are docs that have test vectors, doing a uuencoded tarball (or 
some other armoring that survives text transmission) has been useful for 
those.

A different example, would be appendix A. in RFC4475 for example.

>
> (As was already mentioned in a different branch, YANG now also has RFC 8792, which missed an opportunity to put in bookmarks.)
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email