Re: RFC 1960 to Historic?

[Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>]

The RFC index (the official arbiter of the status of any RFC) currently
says:

1960 A String Representation of LDAP Search Filters. T. Howes. June
     1996. (Format: TXT=5288 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1558) (Obsoleted by
     RFC2254) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

2254 The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters. T. Howes.
     December 1997. (Format: TXT=13511 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1960)
(Status:
     PROPOSED STANDARD)

The obselence of 1960 is already covered.

	Tony Hansen
	tony@att.com

"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:
> 
> In a review of old LDAP RFCs, I noted that "A String Representation of
> LDAP Search Filters" (RFC1960) and "The String Representation of LDAP
> Search Filters" (RFC2254) are both currently listed as Proposed Standards.
> Clearly RFC2254 supercedes RFC1960, I believe it appropriate to recommend
> to the IESG that RFC1960 be moved to historic status under provisions
> set forth in RFC2026, 6.4.  Is there any reason why such a recommendation
> should not be made?
> 
>  http://www.rfc-editor.org/categories/rfc-proposed.html
>  ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc1960.txt
>  ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2254.txt
> 
> Kurt