IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFCs questions / preferences

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Mon, 26 October 2020 22:49 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 6DB4D3A10A0; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:55 -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 JEZe7Kiyl-4y; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:54 -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 0B6DB3A109E; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42620F40744; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:43 -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 3D0A4F40744 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:42 -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 2rMQVQrk-wJ7 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (mail.hardakers.net [168.150.192.181]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5724FF40540 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.0.0.3]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3FF3C28154; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
References: <20201026020433.GA19475@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CADaq8je8gMwAkOndTNJ9ndwzOZb2HQMZrCUJ5wNUjw-6ax9QtA@mail.gmail.com> <35EFE952-7786-4E24-B228-9BEE51D3C876@tzi.org> <CADaq8je85zUHcCOMW6wCy+fiYUPfVE-1sjy3_Xhsxg85ACOkpQ@mail.gmail.com> <A062DE7F-4D21-4731-B59C-89232EACAF5C@tzi.org> <CAHw9_iJQ93M=Mkxd5H0QxgRUcwCTwVmkwFXjgBrKTnpcksx08g@mail.gmail.com> <yblwnzcmz6d.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <20201026221426.GF48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:49:48 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20201026221426.GF48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> (Toerless Eckert's message of "Mon, 26 Oct 2020 23:14:26 +0100")
Message-ID: <yblsga0mwkz.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFCs questions / preferences
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: WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> writes:

> Obviouosly the point of reference needs to be a universal constants
> of the IETF universe. Hence the size of documents needs to be measured
> relative to rfc8200.

Are you telling me that all operators had to do in order to switch
versions was multiple IPv4 by 1.0185 to upgrade to IPv6?  Nice.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI
_______________________________________________
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