IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 28 October 2020 13:39 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 B78E03A09BE; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 mLjDUKQQEFGu; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
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 94A703A0846; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B2F3F40727; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
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 4B92DF40727 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
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 ViYZyntwHF7q for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DFA1F4071F for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from client-0045.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0045.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CLqRc5mxMzyYP; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 14:39:08 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <50907BAE-6CF3-4C38-BBD5-4794A0BFCB2D@tzi.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 14:39:08 +0100
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 625585148.321128-99e398879bfef8f96478aeaea0bd96b4
Message-Id: <3D6D5225-3635-440A-9CE9-FCF432FD87E4@tzi.org>
References: <dd25161f-f8fc-0481-2d06-00907f4068fa@levkowetz.com> <E3D19227-79AF-477A-A929-8D54AAF63F9B@fugue.com> <daf8a9ee-3448-2d96-ec80-7c7553befec2@levkowetz.com> <50907BAE-6CF3-4C38-BBD5-4794A0BFCB2D@tzi.org>
To: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: 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: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>, John Scudder <jgs=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, rsoc@iab.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Fixed (DYAC):

> On 2020-10-28, at 14:38, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> The argument that no IETF-defined process uses a feature in an IETF-provided tool does not mean that the IETF-provided tool should not provide that feature for author use in the process (or even outside the process).

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