Subject: Re: maximum size of packets from client to server

From: Thomas Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:08:45 -0700 (PDT)

der Mouse wrote:
><snip>
> While I still think my reading is right, the wording is now frozen 
> (and thus won't change even if it turns out I'm right) and other
> implementations aren't going to change their deployed base overnight
> even if they agree with me today.

What determines whether or not an RFC is frozen?

---

From: der Mouse <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:34:34 -0400 (EDT)

>> (and thus [...]) [...]

As I understand it (an important qualification here - I may well be
wrong on this), by the time an RFC makes it past the RFC editor and is
published, it is frozen; if it needs changes after that, a new RFC must
be generated and published.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		[email-masked]
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:25:59 -0400

> What determines whether or not an RFC is frozen?

An RFC is immutable once published.  The RFC Editor maintains a list of 
errata on published RFC's, at <http://rfc-editor.org/errata.php>; those 
generally include editorial and technical errors discovered after 
publication.

It is possible to update a specification by publishing a new version. 
However, it seems unlikely that that will happen in this case, unless the 
SSH specifications are being updated for other reasons.

-- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <[email-masked]>
   Carnegie Mellon University - Pittsburgh, PA