![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > Joe Touch wrote: > ... > > > Speaking of keeping standards, I am wondering why STD-2 > > > is still RFC-1700, although the current version is kept by > > > IANA at http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm . > > > > Very good question. I'll be glad to raise the issue with IANA; > > at least 1700 and STD-2 should be obsoleted in their current form. > > afaik nothing in 1700 has been rescinded, so it isn't obsolete; > it's simply updated by http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm I was using the term 'obsolete' as in 'obsoleted by', as used in other standards that have been updated by subsequent RFCs. > IANA can't change the status of an STD - that's an IESG action. > If you think this matters, I would raise it with the latter. Agreed. I was expecting that IANA would initiate taking the action with the IESG, not that they would supercede it. Joe
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.