[ih] Karl's post from Friday: Re: Interop as part of Internet History

[Brian Carpenter]

"historic" tends to mean "obsolete" as an RFC label. They could just be
labelled "informational" l think. But there are other issues (no photos,
for example).

Regards
    Brian
    (via tiny screen & keyboard)

On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, 22:21 vinton cerf via Internet-history, <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> good question. the independent RFC stream is pretty open; historic is
> usually with reference to a protocol so it would likely be considered a
> re-interpretation of the intent of the term. Regardless of the label, I
> don't see why a historical account could not be an independent stream
> submission.
> v
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 6:10 AM dave walden via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> > Can a historical RFC be an original document written today about ih
> > history more generally than about earlier RFCs?  If so, that sounds good
> > to me as long as the existence of the RFC series on the web is stable.
> > If not, creating such a series with appropriate indexing and guidelines
> > seems like a good idea to me.
> >
> > On 9/14/2020 4:31 AM, Vint Cerf wrote:
> > > What about publishing as historical RFCS?
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Internet-history mailing list
> > Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> >
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>