ght before them.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 10:16 PM -0800 2/15/05, Wes Hardaker wrote:
So if you want to look for something new in the 4000+ range, look at
4001 as being special.
It's not really a secret, so I'll spoil the ending: it's a MIB.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
willing to take the lead, that is valuable information
about the work being done.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
list, will not help increase the security of
the Internet.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
tion should not be
null.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 8:15 PM +0200 7/11/05, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 5:15 PM +0200 7/6/05, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
RFC 2434 doesn't discuss null IANA sections at all. RFC2434bis does discuss
them, and we will need to form consensus about whether the RFC Editor is
required to retain
users, I would say it would be "bad" to introduce it now. A
similar model would be fine in other contexts, but not the DNS or the
IP address space.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.
them; that way, we can judge what they are judging. If it was
a pointer to an Internet Draft, great; a pointer to some other
document(s) works just as well.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1
;the Public-Root is not an alternative
root but a solution" seems dishonest when one reads the material at
the site describing the service.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ou prevent mDNS, the main
proponent of the .local namespace, from becoming a standard, the
number of those names will remain low. If it becomes a standard and
implementers use that namespace more, the load will of course
increase.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
-
raffic that is moved daily over it.
--Paul Hoffman, who shares a lot of legal music and OSs with BitTorrent
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
IETF.
Sure seems like it to me. Should we be
concerned?
Nope.
Might there be film at 11 at some point because
of it?
Yes, if one that has bad congestion control becomes popular. But,
given the mindshare of BitTorrent these past few years, that seems
pretty unlikely.
--Paul
root, not a real root, so it seems
that you knowing what real root operators would do is particularly
unlikely.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
e proviso that
this TLD must not be resolved, except locally ?
Absolutely not. There are already literally dozens (if not hundreds)
of such local tlds, some of which have the same names for different
purposes.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
inside and outside the IETF, that matches the definitions that some
WG participants thought were the ones we should be using.")
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ourse, the ability to listen has also been very helpful as well.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
#x27;t read RFC 2119. Often, what they really want is "MAY (and it is
a very good idea)" but they feel like making it MORE IMPORTANT anyway.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
andable". The same
would be true for documents where there is explanatory text and {
ABNF | C code | Perl code | ASN.1 | ... }.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
do just fine with ASCII art. We have
non-standards documents, which we want the outside world to read,
that look silly with the current formatting restrictions. We live
with projecting that visual clumsiness, as geeks often do.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
tting Internet Drafts. It is acceptable to turn
in unpaginated plain text, and the number of columns is only required
for ASCII art if you want your Internet Draft to be eventually
published as an RFC.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf ma
At 3:58 AM -0500 11/26/05, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Friday, November 25, 2005 10:45 AM -0800 Paul Hoffman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 9:13 PM -0800 11/24/05, Christian Huitema wrote:
An interesting part of the current text format is that it is
defined in a very simple way: so many
of privacy is needed. It is also arbitrary until someone can
say how much strength each algorithm gives the protocol, and that has
yet to be stated.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
d not
assume that every person reading the document could display it. They
would put a legend or explanation near the example.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 5:59 PM -0800 11/30/05, Douglas Otis wrote:
On Nov 30, 2005, at 2:23 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 1:54 PM -0800 11/30/05, Douglas Otis wrote:
Rather than opening RFCs to text utilizing any character-set
anywhere, as this draft suggests,
That is not what the RFC suggests at all. The
entities in examples are supposed to be
the escaped or unescaped versions.
UTF-8 use would require
additional considerations regarding searching however.
Please list those; they would be valuable for the Internet Draft.
--Paul Hoffman, Direc
or our grandchildren.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
nts.
It is fortunate that the Atompub WG didn't have language like this in
our charter, because we made many improvements from the
widely-deployed, pre-IETF Atom 0.3 spec. Having such language would
have made it harder to get them in the final spec, and therefore
would have degraded th
At 4:25 PM +0200 1/2/06, John Loughney wrote:
Just out of curiosity, when browsing www.ietf.org, I noticed that
the Neustar logo on www.ietf.org is larger than the ISOC logo. Any
particular reason why? It just kind of jumps out at you
Eeeew. Fully agree.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN
Why are we talking about the input formats and not the output
formats? Are people suggesting that we allow LaTeX and so on as
*output* formats and appear in Internet Drafts and RFCs?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
the
design-by-entire-IETF-mailing-list work factor. Instead, a bit of
human interaction is much less expensive.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
of time and include it in
the registration packet. The cost of a ream of paper is small
relative to the lost productivity this causes. Heck, maybe even put
it on the IETF web site ahead of time.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote:
It's a classic example of the current IETF fashion for process over substance.
Fully agree. What is the justification for this becoming an RFC?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
guration issue with your particular copy of
Safari. I can go to the registration page just fine on "the latest
version of Safari" without hitting any dialog boxes. Safari tells me
that the cert is valid.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
At 4:06 PM -0500 2/29/08, Turner, Sean P. wrote:
> >In addition, it is not acceptable to reference in the
>>*normative* references "work in progess", i.e.[ECCADD].
>
>I'm pretty sure this is done all the time. There are 17 IDs in the RFC
>editor queue with works-in-progress in normative references
At 3:06 PM +0100 3/3/08, Denis Pinkas wrote:
> >> >While I welcome this draft, everybody should take into
consideration that, if the SHA2 family happens to be broken
then we will be at risk.
This should be mentioned into the security considerations section.
>>>
>>>If an algorithm is c
ave implemented and
deployed it, and they can certainly talk about deploying the DKIM TXT
records and limitations that they encountered (if any).
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mail
d text has been part of the documents, we could easily explain
>how and why that license doesn't meet a needed criteria.
So could an email to him and the rest of the Trust. Note the difference.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 7:30 PM +0200 3/30/08, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>Paul Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > These are interesting points, but maybe not interesting in the way
>> you intended. If some large group (in this example, the Debian folks)
>> want to have some restrict
s about what errors would cause
problems of what magnitude.
In the end, it is probably better for readers of the errata to have
just one category, and for the IESG to not waste its time
differentiating between the two categories.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
ze something important into the second list. I guess I'm
arguing for less work for all of us at the expense of a bit more
categorizing of importance for the implementers.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
orial nits
and only a dozen significant errata, a developer reading the whole
list would not spend more than an hour or two separating the wheat
from the chaff.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
le *not* to put the
ISSN designation in their Internet Drafts (which are not part of the
RFC series), but then switch it on for the RFC, and so on.
The cost of putting "ISSN: 12345678" on a few pages at rfc-editor.org
and ietf.org is tiny and hopefully sufficient for t
At 5:03 PM -0400 5/30/08, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
>I'm not sure if
> > that needs a separate "review netiquette RFC", IMO it should be
>> a part of the "Tao", or the next Tao if it is not already clear.
>
>Paul Hoffman is working on the TAObis.
this; I
did; it was fine" reviews. Group communication, in both directions
for a review, helps everyone. It also helps prevent a WG hearing that
"I changed this thing we had all agreed to because I was told to by {
a security person | an IAB member | an ex-AD | .
what has changed in an RFC has
to read the errata list *and* look at some view of the the RFC
database to determine if the RFC has been updated, obsoleted, made
historic, and so on. Having that notation in the errata list will
help more readers, and hurt no one.
--
he RFC metadata referred to above could be updated at the time a new
RFC is approved in its stream, not at the time the RFC itself is
published.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
aobis is
still definitely an open document. (For IETF newcomers reading this
thread: the latest version of the Tao can be found at
<http://www.ietf.org/tao.html>.)
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
. I was approached by one such fine, upstanding citizen who asked
which names "currently reserved by the IETF" would be most valuable
for a search page.
This does not mean that ICANN won't listen to the IETF; it means that
there will be voices more familiar to ICANN saying thin
ld be easy to just add privacy to that
protocol"; they should scoff at us for making wild guesses about
values in a huge, unregulated business that is less than ten years
old.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
being "too cautious". They have money
behind them, and we have our reputation. ICANN gets to weigh those
two against each other. This is somewhat parallel to the political
process in most capitalist democracies.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
ever-so-popular "biz" TLD.
"tld" seems like an excellent suggestion. Not much like any current
TLDs; it's well-known in the field of use; it is unlikely that there
is much commercial value to it; it's nearly impossible to pronounce
without spelling out the acr
At 2:33 PM -0700 7/17/08, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed.
Maybe this could be delayed until the spring meeting in San
Francisco. Many people who will bring their families to Minneapolis
. The very small pile that remains, including interviews with
our leadership about where they think the IETF is going and in-depth
articles comparing multiple contenders being considered in IETF
areas, are mostly written by Carolyn Duffy Marsan.
--Paul Hoffman,
An additional check should be added to the list: all URLs that are
meant to be able to be resolved must actually resolve at the time of
submission.
For example, the first URL in the ID-Checklist document does not resolve...
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
nd doesn't give attribution. Is the IETF
Trust really going to sue them over the lack of attribution? If not,
why even have that addition to the BSD license? Like in our technical
protocols, simplicity is good here.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
-
on of the source of the code in the code itself,
such as "This code was derived from IETF RFC ".
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
r own amendment summarizing the dispute.
These are fairly easy to follow and give latitude to the moderator.
Concerns about censorship or incompetence on the part of the
moderator are dealt with fairly easily: the aggrieved party can send
mail to the IETF mailing list.
Thoughts?
--Paul Hoffman, Dir
rking on a list, perhaps to report
back to the RFC Editor well before the end of March :-(. In
addition, having a volunteer make those decisions could easily lead
to claims of conflict of interest and we don't want to go there.
That works for me just as well as a NomCom appointee.
--Pa
endering
plant" is also valid.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
e to me, compared to inventing a
new process that effectively have the same properties.
I did not mean my proposal to be a new process, just a delta from the
current process that is mostly working.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailin
s no changes from the current format for Internet
Drafts or RFCs. It does require that the RFC Editor add some tools
and maintain URLs in a consistent manner, but that is what they are
paid to do. It also avoids the problems that have been listed so far.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
I agree with John, and strongly disagree with Yakov, that agreeing on
a format for text with embedded graphics for the RFC series is still
impossible.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 3:01 AM +0200 8/26/08, Frank Ellermann wrote:
>Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
>>> It has to be tuned for the "or more" part of "one or more".
>
>> I can't fully parse your meaning, but I think I disagree.
>
>Yes, I also think we disagree. I pref
gs that are difficult to render in ASCII.
It sure it. It just turns out to be a terrible format for extracting
text as anything other than lines, and even then doesn't work
reliably with commonly-used tools
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
__
;. Because
tools.ietf.org makes reading Internet Draft diffs so easy, there is
really no good reason to not have the input to the RFC Editor be a
known-clean document.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
e "authors are too
slow to post a new draft" state are WG items, a two-line note from
the AD to the WG upbraiding the authors for not turning in the new
draft should get a quick result. Better still, the original note that
was asking for a new draft with minor edits can be Cc'
t have done otherwise.
It is not clear to me that there is much value to the above kind of
public statement for IAB members, but it would probably also be find
for the IAOC slot.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
*incompatible* versions of their protocols?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/mail11.html>
In particular, please see my comment at
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg53066.html>, in
which I make a counter-proposal that makes no changes to the current
Internet Draft format and gives more flexibility in the
Given the recent discussion of changes that might be made to the RFC
format, this seems to be relevant again. The need certainly continues
to grow.
The discussion of this should probably be on the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list instead of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--Paul Hoffman
A New Internet
there. I will put a note to that effect in the
-04 version.
If the document moves to IETF Last Call, it will certainly get discussed here.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ing of the section it applies to.
3) Other
Not really a nit: the document consists of two profiles, but the Abstract says
"a profile".
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ding a new value, they can
write an RFC for it and create the registry at that time.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ther here. I read SM's message
>as adding VBR-Info: to the list of known mail header lines here:
>
>http://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/perm-headers.html
>
That's right, I misread SM's message. We'll include this in the next
draft. Oh, and also fix t
am an erroneous target). The text seems to be
all about bits-on-the-wire interoperability that affects large and small ISPs.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ur message would not
have been blocked. What are you advocating here?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ssumption.
Who do you think are making those assumptions?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 8:56 AM +1300 12/13/08, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>I'm disappointed at how few people have signed up.
+1. The Trust even had cookies in the room when I signed my old form. New form
is on the way to them.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Co
ng to sound like to me.
>
>IANAL, but it seems to me that we should proceed on the assumption
>that this would fall under fair use provisions. Anything else
>would seem unreasonable to me.
IANAL, and I'm only following about 10% of this thread, but the phrase "fair
use" do
me?
If so, that wording seems fine. If not, document authors will need pretty
detailed guidance about when *not* to put this boilerplate in a document.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
l prevent them from suing the IETF and incurring great costs in time and
money. A very very careful boilerplate *might* cause them to be less likely to
win damages, but balancing that against the time and effort we put into the
boilerplate is literally impossible to do.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--
At 1:10 PM -0500 1/26/09, Sam Hartman wrote:
>I think having an opt-in list of people who have agreed to IETF IPR
>policy would be better.
That list could be pre-populated with email addresses from all current IETF
lists to which the "note well" has been sent.
--Paul Hoffman
org/public/pidtracker.cgi?...
>
>by simply:
>
>| The draft and related information (including IESG discussion) can be
>| obtained via:
>| http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xxx-yyy-zzz-nn
>
+1
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
t
>about this issue to the free software community may be causing
>inconvenience, but causing inconvenience was not the point of that
>call.
Welcome to the world of calls for action having unintended negative
consequences. The IETF has our own history with that...
--Paul Hoffman, Di
that are going to be widely referenced, if for no other
reason than to alert the authors of the documents that will reference
them that they have an opportunity for open discussion.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf
mentation is correct in this area is not
a good idea, at least from the hands-on experience in our lab.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Many IETF lists are archived at gmane.org, which does feeds for most
or all of the lists it collects.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
lt;https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea>. The
post-Dallas discussions have been quite fruitful, and the discussion
this week particularly so.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.
rs or customers.
Moving PS -> H seems reasonable, but is the effort of defining and,
more important, implementing PS -> S worth the benefit of having some
things have a special status?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf maili
l and certainly useful to the IETF community, but maybe we
shouldn't be mandating a protocol we haven't even started to
standardize.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 11:53 PM +0200 7/18/06, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
Hi Paul,
on 2006-07-18 22:31 Paul Hoffman said the following:
At 8:27 PM +0200 7/18/06, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
Should we require that the current availability through rsync and ftp
is continued?
Maybe I'm being a bit pedantic here
ion of rsync greater
than X.Y.Z', or some such. The current debian stable version (2.6.4-6)
would work for me.
Saying "rsync version 2.6 or later" works for me, as long as we
understand the "can't eat our own dogfood" aspect of this requirement.
--Paul Hoffman, Dir
not they should implement various standards,
both in the positive sense ("is it worth paying an OEM to include
this?") and in the negative sense ("will we look silly if we include
this, even though it is in the standard?").
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
different (and, in this case,
strongly-held) views, but consensus was reached and agreed to by the
AD and with the DNS folks.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
asking the IETF's armchair lawyers to start firing up their
keyboards? :-)
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 7:55 AM -0800 2/2/07, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
(seriously: Just Do It!)
Isn't this a perfect test case for the IETF meeting Wiki? I know that
there was little contribution in San Diego, but this sounds like a
good opportunity to see if folks can find and edit the wiki.
-
nd it to ietf@ietf.org so others can see and
maybe comment on those suggestions and questions.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
At 1:39 PM -0800 2/16/07, Lucy Lynch wrote:
So, my question to the community, as the author of this admittedly
pitiful draft is:
Should I withdraw the draft and publish it as an IAOC approved ION?
Yes. It is a great use of IONs.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
x27;t want
the NATs they have now, and that they instead want to become firewall
administrators.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
refs to dead documents would anyway add yet
*> more cruft to the RFC process, so let's not.
*>
*> S.
*>
s/cruft/integrity/
How does adding a downref to a dead document add more integrity to
the RFC process?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
1 - 100 of 495 matches
Mail list logo
