Re: [tcpm] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-tcpm-urgent-data-00

At 10:29 a.m. 09/11/2008, Stefanos Harhalakis wrote:

>What Fernando says (as far as i understand) is that we have a reality here
>where everyone does the X thing (where X may be "wrong"). This is a reality
>and we have to accept it.
>
>After accepting that this actually happens, we must either (a) persuade
>everyone to change their implementation or (b) update the RFC.
>
>It seems that (a) isn't possible since it will introduce a backward
>incompatibility and practically invalidate the urgent pointer as a whole.
>
>Since everyone does the X thing we can easily update the RFC without
>practically changing the actual meaning (or interpretation since everyone
>does it already the other way) of UP.
>
>RFCs MUST be at sync with the real world. Having RFCs that don't represent
>reality makes RFCs as a whole (or at least TCP related) less valuable and
>less respectable. This will also save time and pain from all current and
>future TCP implementors.

Exactly!

Kind regards,

--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm