Re: RFC 4612 - historic status

To: Eliot Lear <lear at cisco.com>
Subject: Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
From: Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:56:35 +0200
Cc: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej at packetizer.com>, dcrocker at bbiw.net, ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <44E01059.10303@cisco.com>
List-help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: IBM
References: <012101c6bf4f$1f7c9de0$0a01a8c0@madrid> <44E01059.10303@cisco.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

Eliot Lear wrote:

Paul E. Jones wrote:

I wonder how customers might react to seeing new gateway hardware produced
utilizing "historic" RFCs.  What does that mean?


It means that one standards body has decided to cite a specification
that has been deprecated by another.

It would have been better, imho, if ITU had decided to cite the non-deprecated
image/* MIME types, but that is not a decision the IETF can control.

    Brian

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
  - From: todd glassey
- Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
  - From: John C Klensin
- RE: RFC 4612 - historic status
  - From: Paul E. Jones

References:
- RE: RFC 4612 - historic status
  - From: Paul E. Jones
- Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
  - From: Eliot Lear

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.