IETF Logo Mail Archive

[rfc-i] Feedback solicited: Update tags draft

ekr at rtfm.com (Eric Rescorla) Sat, 29 February 2020 14:18 UTC

From: "ekr at rtfm.com"
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 06:18:57 -0800
Subject: [rfc-i] Feedback solicited: Update tags draft
In-Reply-To: <49F70083-5388-49CA-8A5D-54324C04538C@tzi.org>
References: <447718E1-D2EF-41B1-94DD-AB121EAA79BB@gmail.com> <179BB23D-825A-4177-B656-1B396903C7D8@gmail.com> <CABcZeBODoQTd+fdgqpLwXWhE5P35gTN5S-3zN5+_+7Mcb4PbzQ@mail.gmail.com> <AB0B3305-FCEC-48E6-A916-B86245CD1C3E@gmail.com> <CABcZeBMCZfSxTXUj0+Kuy2QJi+vJHcPpWjydobTD4ztuzTR2rQ@mail.gmail.com> <49F70083-5388-49CA-8A5D-54324C04538C@tzi.org>
Message-ID: <CABcZeBP5M2feGVT5e+NhP_UtUaRxJMd_PxuEDTSmrWGr2PjtTg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 6:12 AM Carsten Bormann <cabo at tzi.org> wrote:

> On 2020-02-29, at 14:50, Eric Rescorla <ekr at rtfm.com> wrote:
> >
> > However, what would you say in the latter case?  Older implementations
> > continue to be conformant with RFC X, but just not with RFC Y,
>
> We would need boilerplate in each RFC that includes potential future
> amendments.
>

I don't understand how that would work, and it's hard to see how you could
reason about it.

-Ekr


> Gr??e, Carsten
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20200229/0fe4de19/attachment.html>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email