Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Because the IESG believed that specifying an image format
> as an audio subtype was to be discouraged, but should be documented
> for reference.
Historically, "documenting for reference" produces an Informational status,
rather than Historic.
>From RFC 2026:
> 4.2.2 Informational
>
> An "Informational" specification is published for the general
> information of the Internet community, and does not represent an
> Internet community consensus or recommendation.
Why the change for this document?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions
of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
