[ih] Status of RFCs that were not IETF RFCs

[vinton cerf]

good advice, Brian,

Vint


On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 8:25 PM Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Thanks Greg.
>
> However I'd encourage everybody to sideline this issue until the RFC
> Editor system is no longer in its current interim status (an acting Series
> Editor) and we have a proper system in place for defining policy. At that
> point there'll be a community forum (a.k.a. the RFC Series WG) where this
> discussion can happen in a seemly way.
>
> It can't possibly be urgent, since we are discussing RFCs over 35 years
> old.
>
> Regards
>     Brian
>
> On 22-Jan-22 12:41, Greg Skinner via Internet-history wrote:
> > I recently submitted a request to have RFC911’s status changed to
> Historic as a result of some things I found out about it during the course
> of the “first router” discussion here last fall.  The request has
> (unexpectedly) sparked some discussions about  how to handle the status of
> other RFCs that were issued before the current IETF standardization process
> was adopted.  In case you weren’t aware of these discussions, see the
> following links:
> >
> >
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/ZLhdZge4iRrpmgVSZdXI7EVeFow/
> <
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/ZLhdZge4iRrpmgVSZdXI7EVeFow/
> >
> >
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/4k87_2fColpmnhfKYe8ywiYURxM/
> <
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/4k87_2fColpmnhfKYe8ywiYURxM/
> >
> >
> > I thought I should call attention to these discussions since several
> participants of this list authored or edited RFCs that fall into this
> category and/or might be able to provide valuable input.
> >
> > —gregbo
> >
>
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>