Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?
Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com> Tue, 27 October 2020 01:41 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 908E03A11E2; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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=ribose.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 qoAuOPlj7PpM; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:45 -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 C45433A11DD; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D1BF407A0; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:34 -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 C0CBCF407A0 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:33 -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=ribose.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 RUF9nVDTbgg3 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from APC01-PU1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr1320083.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.132.83]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E13D5F4078F for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=avTpbAkag67dXlfPVcl/gFE0RbDpfJEWKjMk+vscIkk/HU/GzL4V62QhYtTKEVUU9n3ddr1ee6TkTYWSLhZZKDyFQmlAXy0MEZfekxIg9PfhTkE753bHeoQtoWUyVTu9Q6b9YTkPcVjv5Zr6vXylV23CUA20DZKrz7RD5+bQIVobdGrSHSZmnFvZMG3WZJyNlocUz9AxBKIF9mkIm+k8h0cb90KbrvoUke7+RezN6N0wxUZQRjMaIJ4tb98HKAnuLyVyrSjGEUTxg0rO/ysjG4BevptEsDgcfpi/+eFGlXdEuqqEdsvGFm3nfioOZ5w/VyoJa1q92ToHmc6vSTIKcQ==
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=oPGoZZCq4S9WyfDEpNgM3TS6+RMIhPG9fzeD6yFNViE=; b=b0wTGyzRszizYED3kF/PfuKC58wJ6Kqqn/FeSrFFkynF3mejxKJnDF7HCWS1aaiFkZJTFy8xel+9+/bnkPgljpcHoKo55tidPRBjeBulvUO12bwwf44wEJWtuMAbHbVctbPJF766ECsmVzmqkurm40/QBGTC6Sm9WdmMQEMJHcLvomDJmDo1JHfn5ugdj6vciJhqkarAowGPUbyA00iuzm9/7j7NYyR9Hh4PHaruOZdRrrWDONCPbzSisx8bZeBOcvR8rYiyiAJTAIAeLtAuTbuDRXu7DvfbOqbLzazNkkg9Br6D7UHahT5mhzEdypi3VoytXPQILbMByt4NzellJA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ribose.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ribose.com; dkim=pass header.d=ribose.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ribose.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=oPGoZZCq4S9WyfDEpNgM3TS6+RMIhPG9fzeD6yFNViE=; b=TOGM234PGoj6Bd4qOAFgs8C7b+st+XCRDowM3ehZTIKzKlEkwQXZEPkwqBibOEOGU+QL+1LE8SvqL1fppUbrK/F5wGHQRgFtnB/gPSUnAdpLM3uVRoBjRi1tD2p5t/m1LM+WWkGoMezPmd7EE9xBSdaTwaNWycTyEgZ1ecp3su4=
Received: from HK0PR01MB2900.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:1096:203:98::14) by HK2PR01MB3124.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:1096:202:19::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3477.25; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 01:41:30 +0000
Received: from HK0PR01MB2900.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([fe80::b8:4b19:ebf4:7724]) by HK0PR01MB2900.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([fe80::b8:4b19:ebf4:7724%5]) with mapi id 15.20.3477.029; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 01:41:30 +0000
From: Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Thread-Topic: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?
Thread-Index: AQHWq8nHuGg0JtFOcUGgjys0Ih1qXamqaPaxgAAmtQCAAAn2gIAADAmAgAAEWYCAAAL+Sg==
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 01:41:29 +0000
Message-ID: <C62EA6EF-4981-4042-954F-FC77CB9152F3@ribose.com>
References: <20201026020433.GA19475@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CADaq8je8gMwAkOndTNJ9ndwzOZb2HQMZrCUJ5wNUjw-6ax9QtA@mail.gmail.c om> <35EFE952-7786-4E24-B228-9BEE51D3C876@tzi.org> <20201026150241.GK48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20201026162814.GP39170@kduck.mit.edu> <20201026164036.GO48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <1a56dc3b-56ef-3ffb-a12b-44d5e0d0f835@levkowetz.com> <20201026171931.GP48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <b733240-fc78-5a71-8920-ff84fbf64287@iecc.com> <20201026180105.GQ48111@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <03976f9f-7f49-7bf7-ce29-ee989232a44d@gmail.com> <7FA8EF59-5CDE-42B9-A487-520531EEA1F0@juniper.net> <65374aef-e018-7bc8-ce50-d5c0a3982bf7@gmail.com> <DE3C9D6AE8EF94D87936DAE7@PSB> <75918E93-96A2-4C9A-9D60-570E7A0E1B22@ribose.com> <C393B7270B2043C75B6CA7B8@PSB>, <EB282B9A-8562-43B5-AC65-31FD2CF64C5D@ribose.com>
In-Reply-To: <EB282B9A-8562-43B5-AC65-31FD2CF64C5D@ribose.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ribose.com;
x-originating-ip: [203.145.94.130]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d062ce8e-d9ba-4e1e-7cad-08d87a196d61
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HK2PR01MB3124:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <HK2PR01MB3124351C3145BD1121A72D1CD7160@HK2PR01MB3124.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: A1kUHrefQC/S3CahISv+HQvJR0eEo2br+TEO/sFz8XkUeqCq5DZDConp9IGXou0j7WnUBc6iGThtht9YuwBAW77uMtKLPIS2TeSkvzz31dzvxjpzXXqf6PYJSN2YHI+3j5pwApbnru9+5TuShvQEBrr5YlvEXXA12gIDfHC2BscDKgQ6A8vrRIX+pKP/UV5RJaK1yJBebosPBssmuS4HCBes1am1Noz9y6FiPNpxrh6CXgJYMoY/QHM7zV4tI4+hU/4TESvX/2PQxgba9SyIJFh4xcNDeFFE3tIkOuX99MQYpzjq//26SkzH+gpJa+MEMMlh2kL2JPGLT8nEl4sZKH6BXPYEVeEykQAI9X6ZDozJinWior/BcUgay4s8iAVkZL20qZMKtFDSh49BTP/6fQ==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HK0PR01MB2900.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(396003)(39830400003)(136003)(346002)(366004)(376002)(64756008)(6486002)(6506007)(86362001)(83380400001)(26005)(66446008)(53546011)(71200400001)(4326008)(54906003)(66946007)(36756003)(2616005)(66556008)(66476007)(76116006)(8936002)(33656002)(6512007)(186003)(5660300002)(2906002)(966005)(478600001)(316002)(8676002)(6916009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ribose.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HK0PR01MB2900.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d062ce8e-d9ba-4e1e-7cad-08d87a196d61
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Oct 2020 01:41:29.9252 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: d98a04ff-ef98-489b-b33c-13c23a2e091a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: IiX5nTYbC98D0tv7MzCkwPYymNh/MjXXYxOGwrpiGxJDnx/kHE9FwBT0XJDbSf/N
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK2PR01MB3124
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] 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: "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, "rsoc@iab.org" <rsoc@iab.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0008578281670418157=="
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
I did mean to say that it is very useful to have page numbers, headers and footers on paginated output, eg. PDF. If the TXT version is also intended for printing (I only read them on a computer, but I digress), it should retain them. _____________________________________ Ronald Tse Ribose Inc. On Oct 27, 2020, at 9:31 AM, Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com> wrote: Thanks John for the clarification. There is some confusion to me whether the intention is just about the TXT output having page numbers, or for the PDF to also have the same page numbers, and whether to use page numbers inside cross references. There was a also discussion about a ToC and page numbers, but perhaps that was a diversion. If the discussion is only about the ASCII output having page numbers, I have no objection because it is (nearly) purely cosmetic (in publication and in usage of the text, being done by xml2rfc). If having page numbers will require the PDF output to also have page numbers, this inevitably leads to some shared spec between the TXT and PDF outputs on the topic of pagination, which is less ideal, but since I assume that is the work of xml2rfc, it’s not a concern to us as tool maintainers. Adding page numbers to cross references can make reading confusing — since the cross references between the paginated and flowed versions will render these references differently. It’s doable, but again this requirement ties the paginated versions (TXT and PDF) together for consistency. Of course, if the PDF output is simply an enhanced PDF-ized TXT version, these aren’t really issues. _____________________________________ Ronald Tse Ribose Inc. On Oct 27, 2020, at 9:15 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com<mailto:john-ietf@jck.com>> wrote: --On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 00:32 +0000 Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com<mailto:tse@ribose.com>> wrote: My two cents: why don't we just run a poll to see what the "consensus" is? There are some other issues with polls that people have addressed so I won't repeat here, but... To me, standardizing page numbers is the wrong direction — one of the features of XML RFC is to allow rendering content into different formats. Having page numbers for the ASCII version is fine (it's only being done by xml2rfc anyway), but requiring these numbers inside the XML is putting the cart before the horse. Unless I have missed something important as I have skimmed this thread, no one has advocated anything that could be described as "requiring ... numbers inside the XML". We had paginated and numbered RFCs all through the lives of xml2rfc v1 and v2 and still have paginated and numbered I-Ds, none of them requiring numbering within the XML source. The issue here, at least as I understand it, is that we have three output forms for RFCs: PDF (inherently page-image and paginated), HTML (inherently producing output that is line-flowed and unpaginated although it can certainly produce other forms as rendered results), and text. The latter was originally supposed to be preserved in as close to the historical ASCII text pages as possible but the powers that be decided that the conversion from the XML should retain the fixed-length lines but drop pagination and headers and footers with line numbers. AFAICT, it is only that last decision that is under review / discussion here. And, again, if the PDF form did not have those headers and footers with page numbers on the latter, I'd be much more sympathetic to arguments that page numbers were harmful (or confusing, etc.) and should hence be suppressed in RFCs. And even if one accepts page numbers as evil, that doesn't make a case against paginating and retaining headers and footers in the text format. But I think I'm repeating myself so should stop. john _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
_______________________________________________ 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