Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFCs questions / preferences
Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Tue, 27 October 2020 15:00 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 7EE1E3A0E8A; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:33 -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 u06R-f1sMcjS; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:31 -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 AEFA83A0E8C; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D95F40704; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:12 -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 67CF9F406F7 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:11 -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 y4_o8WxB_FFM for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr760047.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.76.47]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70B5AF40704 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 08:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=L0EbgYXhlW1xrfyvyIG0X7F1AWLqOguobOQfV7YaiKKVwla/NFfPWs4exn+tqPpskZuoK2iv2D7p9mVK2ujVB2FnwyDDQbql/Div3Eef3QBFxLxwSOesiMOqENzUHk4dkig/2Rtd0PyCRVVLmpiVRt9nqDg+8M9s1A6xEi7m2eYL2ZhGkwrf1Ep+4Dmx316bI/MvyOqyxzavcAX3FUnrmOgYAEEJqUce0lWPeoCu+uLehqb2DWsXhMrpsl1SdTgSZ+VMvvuLP+13Rb27Qy79zwfbX4SW0+59SL2kgWEzj1HMVg3VmUzu95prIxWR2fhJtOhDoXR7mkZKEB9bal2dlA==
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=DUfSuqXYCvf/49qOOMZ6WuaE6UkQBpZ73ByQYbf42bY=; b=YC9hlCwxMVNrX3yPRE0vWQS3VmGKY8ZX9XUjXMg7cU+epzmt56s4ILrE4U+VM0AStfj5UCtwFVBgUjXJUTK5EoWJ5NBTUEL/an5R/XmvvEJD11WLzlt8sTyy9sTwX/NiJiZoTDHP0TW1zRXlrGAIqqu11pKgTcdVXR7df5hGSwLz6eUtaNTDC5qIFQcqk3z7HyZ0oZ8xcI8zveCSGoVCc87K4AeX5cCO0MWDzvr2TH+bq/lS8XicOWRqxU7/ipcq2CIxfNnHqpyn5a43PL3RJBpxInO5x9zi5M7iK2G6d79m4IY6PPC4VbBI+Kf6asnpqQEZAcpnhYC4npuKbyMojA==
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=DUfSuqXYCvf/49qOOMZ6WuaE6UkQBpZ73ByQYbf42bY=; b=R3wNb4RORksnhsvTIzkBbDrZ/+OXolEou0CkcB8PDaPuFy/5wTcviLbDuqpJH+SY/bEqZxZvbeeAPsu0yKOtR+DyPHcb29Cls+xKAVuGff39lYLIngQJVwqWiE/QCKT9K1tROyCgt47YOmP7hEkI4HNSJ3gEIR/zdaUVoeL16nw=
Received: from MN2PR20CA0026.namprd20.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:e8::39) by MN2PR12MB3950.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:16d::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3477.21; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:00:17 +0000
Received: from BL2NAM02FT047.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:e8:cafe::97) by MN2PR20CA0026.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:208:e8::39) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.18 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:00:17 +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 BL2NAM02FT047.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.77.9) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.20 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:00:16 +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 09RF0EG3029573 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:00:16 -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>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <f647c3b1-37aa-f43b-6b57-cd7d895f3c23@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:00:14 -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: <47e062c3-0f1f-02fd-d77f-645863af93aa@gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: a0ebaa4e-1acb-413e-7e9e-08d87a89040c
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: MN2PR12MB3950:
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <MN2PR12MB3950291721FDCF48A3D919BFF9160@MN2PR12MB3950.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:10000;
X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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
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:(346002)(39860400002)(396003)(136003)(376002)(46966005)(956004)(47076004)(31686004)(2906002)(8676002)(786003)(316002)(356005)(36906005)(75432002)(6916009)(8936002)(83380400001)(70586007)(5660300002)(478600001)(7596003)(2616005)(82740400003)(186003)(82310400003)(53546011)(966005)(336012)(70206006)(26005)(86362001)(31696002)(43740500002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
X-OriginatorOrg: alum.mit.edu
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Oct 2020 15:00:16.9111 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a0ebaa4e-1acb-413e-7e9e-08d87a89040c
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: BL2NAM02FT047.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR12MB3950
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>
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 10/27/20 1:11 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 27-Oct-20 12:53, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 06:24:27PM -0400, John Levine wrote: >>> In article <20201026215117.GY39170@kduck.mit.edu> you write: >>>>> For individual sections, the TOC absolutely should provide linkage to >>>>> sections, especially in formats like HTML. >>>> >>>> The native HTML format does. I have no idea why the htmlization script >>>> can't or does not do so for new-format RFCs. >>> >>> There is no htmlization script for new-format RFCs. The HTML format is >>> produced directly from the XML and has all the links you'd expect, as >>> does the PDF. The text format loses a lot of info visible in the other >>> formats so it is a third-best option. >>> >>> I suppose you could render to text and try to htmlize that but it's >>> hard to imagine a reason to do so. >> >> I don't know what https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8815 is (conveniently >> linked from https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8815/ as "htmlized") if not >> trying to htmlize the text copy. I am well aware that the new format >> produces direct ("native") HTML output, and indeed was attempting to point >> Jeff towards the native HTML output. > > Right. I think we should debate whether it's a good or a bad idea to run > the htmlization script on v3 format documents. I'd say "bad" because all > it does is create confusion. > > Running rfcdiff on the plain text version is very useful, however. I prefer to use the htmlized version when reviewing documents, for a variety of reasons: - it has all those handly links at the top, notably for the diffs, tracker, etc. So with one click I can bring up the diff showing the most recent changes. - it has hot links from the TOC to the sections so that is easily navigated - it is laid out just like the text version. I can cut out sections that I want to comment on and paste them into an email while retaining the formatting. (I prefer to use the side by side diffs when reviewing changes, but often then need to consult the full version for more context. Having the full version match what the diff used is important for this.) Hence I would definitely like to have the htmlized format continue to be available for v3 documents. Since it is created from the txt format I don't see why it is harder to produce than for v2 documents. OTOH, I do now prefer the native html version when reading/consulting a 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