Subject: RE: Editorial snafus in RFC 2751 and RFC 2752

From: Bob Braden <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:37:27 GMT

*> 
  *> Thanks Andrew... 
  *> 
  *> Not surprisingly, I vote to change the RFCs. Isn't proposed standard
  *> status supposed to be ammenable to changes? 
  *> 
  *> Y 

Yoram,

Surely you realize, RFCs DO NOT CHANGE, ever, once they are published.
What you *can* do is to publish a new RFC that obsoletes the bad one.

Such a procedure is hardly unknown in the history of the
Internet ;-)

Bob Braden (wearing his RFC Editor)

---

From: Shai Herzog <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 14:43:51 -0400

I agree.

Seems that having two copies of RFCs 2751 floating around with different
values would be very confusing (even if it was permitted since RFCs don't
have version numbers like IDs).

If we decide to change the values to reflect actual deployed implementations
I think we should re-issue these RFCs with new numbers and obsolete the old
ones.

my 2c

Shai

>Bob Braden (wearing his RFC Editor)

__________________________________________________________________
Shai Herzog, Founder & CTO   IPHighway Inc.   Tel : (914) 654-4810
55 New York Avenue                            Fax : (914) 654-0209
Framingham, MA 01701                          Main: (508) 620-1141