Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf document development
Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Thu, 29 October 2020 14:47 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 44CE83A08A6; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
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=alum.mit.edu
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 oMakylXOCZT8; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:30 -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 CB5153A07BD; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06837F4070B; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:17 -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 2E7F7F4070B for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alum.mit.edu
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 9josXFXdGoaQ for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM12-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm6nam12on2046.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.243.46]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64F9BF406D8 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=PxoXIGvbI7te/F9QiiVCUm3GLQDkWisuB7IwS5co7jYEaaqN/Ew361m0oD8ao80FSCxdkfaKBu+m3YGTO2IyTpGjdzeCfiX9tvD7gWHAla/F9z/i5pO5SxV2eoE4kleP4WMKzleFo5vZhTblewyqcilXqhCb9zkUXQqktYvzViBN0aZZQ6HsUUSMw//S9m4O9+M/Foxcoo41phDonGMPAy7cZJ/OsxGPoHp2dT4fKy5/k2vvGYyHmY81y1M2lIKLQ23B7tIpvEeV742CCOmIz4iJFFRXPCoKCWLL1+VPUsRu5t0s01fkiunj0IaLrVUx8bLztq/A0pzJ7IcHhujUsg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UMelQBNevHIs4ROsI8onN3epasHL30MyFnl7hwE5yvg=; b=UnOI/ko0YOh7lrTgzcJA8SgYPIZojfGXn3r3iR9T5Km0ibH43lJjmCP0PRQjnSHjbUyXLw6QPjHdo0nedWwW1DPehGN1mJcASljVWRoJ046+gcjJzOli95O5LAdvjuQnviLIX1OUVEzbQ7RCCRhwqhCEzQ6knI/G+PWZqvLEvt0PrraKyIRn6R6jZAPvV7Hdruw/51Wvo+q5B/3GxJ55NC2tonsQEe0lJIPBmUlQOn16PTxpYKh45BZBedcNlCzGnqW964rXddV46UOkJbPdZ+Lia9CFmHRfgADv64JsCq12FFRtQi0LQfMd+883uehlUbrKYwGfmVHCUVLxTXt0iQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 18.7.68.33) smtp.rcpttodomain=rfc-editor.org smtp.mailfrom=alum.mit.edu; dmarc=bestguesspass action=none header.from=alum.mit.edu; dkim=none (message not signed); arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alum.mit.edu; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UMelQBNevHIs4ROsI8onN3epasHL30MyFnl7hwE5yvg=; b=YC3OopZgM81WRoPrGrPC2QPpMCZrvBnxYa1spXPDTfiv1iZyPT+NpE2x+Dg0GNxTkQsybArSVwsgakl84Qxm5OwNDkUNt2i3BJA++9nO0isMgIdD2LGiugfIid9qJzxc+6xv5ccp0MyAgz0MBt41ZPEaKXTm3oLdhXD6P3woGfo=
Received: from SN2PR01CA0026.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:804:2::36) by DM6PR12MB2809.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:4a::16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3477.21; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:47:24 +0000
Received: from SN1NAM02FT046.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:804:2:cafe::58) by SN2PR01CA0026.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:804:2::36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.19 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:47:24 +0000
X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 18.7.68.33) smtp.mailfrom=alum.mit.edu; rfc-editor.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;rfc-editor.org; dmarc=bestguesspass action=none header.from=alum.mit.edu;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of alum.mit.edu designates 18.7.68.33 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=18.7.68.33; helo=outgoing-alum.mit.edu;
Received: from outgoing-alum.mit.edu (18.7.68.33) by SN1NAM02FT046.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.72.191) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3520.15 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:47:23 +0000
Received: from PaulKyzivatsMBP.localdomain (c-24-62-227-142.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.62.227.142]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by outgoing-alum.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 09TElLqK005076 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 10:47:22 -0400
To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <20201026215117.GY39170@kduck.mit.edu> <20201026222427.8D3B624F19C4@ary.qy> <20201026235341.GA39170@kduck.mit.edu> <47e062c3-0f1f-02fd-d77f-645863af93aa@gmail.com> <f647c3b1-37aa-f43b-6b57-cd7d895f3c23@alum.mit.edu> <f4726c74-7857-e5cb-b441-dc8b897452bf@gmail.com> <508a1288-ee51-81e6-9d4b-6284fdcb036d@alum.mit.edu> <F6DD272E-8730-4D49-92AA-1F2B4B668FA6@tzi.org> <ce1c66c5-3b7b-436c-9440-5ba69a563b08@www.fastmail.com> <31101.1603971678@localhost>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <1df26944-39ad-37d0-6d8a-c037302a25e2@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 10:47:21 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <31101.1603971678@localhost>
Content-Language: en-US
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 1f40d3b4-b8b4-4190-211d-08d87c198c13
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DM6PR12MB2809:
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <DM6PR12MB2809A5ED910FA827B8E33F06F9140@DM6PR12MB2809.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:6430;
X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: MHkDPTxKM5Wb66VeMfFNOqFdLT4miLTyuzvPC/Mea/c9RsCNBtS1vc4tcJ7ANlh5rQwSkKQasyDRG/N6roHC10LC9XzKcslfpG9goig41ibL09wWbbBz8p33SU9V7tmdQI9h8w3PIcHwNfbQJuSxF0APg67F85J+QwDLK8Mc/ISycgSNdMzHqq/OcSnOByG28pTHQ6BdxSl9PBtl49eX4p4uiMlperEbPMq9X5GJ3UypTsnPhsmZxFy0O400KKY9pFCLsbdQvPYWleTCu5WZ8XzgKgTBmuc1EajAQwm5rxeQdSyh3369TnWCGKA9tujucRS2u6Kb2JpVV6vmhY5rx9B37+CZS8rVWnGsr1B/2xVJ518BgIcTulcUA1RB6j6RRSJ5FrJ1rUuWQjfZOb3PihUT4rrg49IRgNqgpFHurnwmL033Ao7UxHrWOr1s/Ch0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:18.7.68.33; CTRY:US; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:CAL; SFV:NSPM; H:outgoing-alum.mit.edu; PTR:outgoing-alum.mit.edu; CAT:NONE; SFS:(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(346002)(46966005)(36906005)(316002)(8936002)(336012)(31696002)(53546011)(26005)(478600001)(86362001)(75432002)(70586007)(31686004)(956004)(70206006)(82310400003)(47076004)(4744005)(186003)(82740400003)(2906002)(786003)(2616005)(356005)(8676002)(6916009)(7596003)(5660300002)(43740500002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
X-OriginatorOrg: alum.mit.edu
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Oct 2020 14:47:23.6007 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1f40d3b4-b8b4-4190-211d-08d87c198c13
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 3326b102-c043-408b-a990-b89e477d582f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=3326b102-c043-408b-a990-b89e477d582f; Ip=[18.7.68.33]; Helo=[outgoing-alum.mit.edu]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SN1NAM02FT046.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR12MB2809
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf document development
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
On 10/29/20 7:41 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > Receiving comments in the form of a marked up word (or PDF) is, very > bittersweet as an author. Yes, so nice to get smart, extensive, review, but > basically triples the effort to apply the changes. More than triples. The problem is that, at least in ietf process, the comments in each such review themselves should be discussed by the group before being accepted or rejected. In theory this should be handled by adding additional comments to the marked up document. But AFAIK there aren't good ways to thread those comments. (You can try to follow the timestamps, but it is difficult especially when comments are scattered across the document. Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
- Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf docume… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Eliot Lear
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Warren Kumari
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Jay Daley
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [rfc-i] John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs q… Jay Daley
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [rfc-i] Not even sort of a Poll: RFCs with pa… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Wes Hardaker
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John C Klensin
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Wes Hardaker
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John C Klensin
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ronald Tse
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John C Klensin
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John C Klensin
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ronald Tse
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ronald Tse
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John C Klensin
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ronald Tse
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [rfc-i] Resending: Page numbers in RFCs quest… David Noveck
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… David Noveck
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John Scudder
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Flemming Andreasen
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Henk Birkholz
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Henk Birkholz
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … David Noveck
- Re: [rfc-i] Resending: Page numbers in RFCs quest… Fred Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Randy Bush
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John Scudder
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … John Scudder
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFC… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… John R. Levine
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… HANSEN, TONY L
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Michael StJohns
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Julian Reschke
- [rfc-i] An attempt to summarize the "page numbers… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Salz, Rich
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… John Scudder
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Robert Sparks
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [rfc-i] Really not a poll: RFCs with page num… Ted Lemon
- [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf document d… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Andrew Campling
- Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty … Mark Andrews
- Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf docume… Martin Thomson
- Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf docume… Michael Richardson
- Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf docume… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] The role of txt format in ietf docume… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [rfc-i] An attempt to summarize the "page num… Julian Reschke