[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: RFC 1959 to Historic? (revised)

To: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Subject: Re: RFC 1959 to Historic? (revised)
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:06:27 +0100
Cc: Mark Wahl <Mark.Wahl@sun.com>, ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208104443.02cca420@router.boolean.net>
References: <3A82DEE8.44C0A0E5@sun.com> <5.0.2.1.0.20010208092020.02c11e70@router.boolean.net> <3A82DEE8.44C0A0E5@sun.com> <5.0.2.1.0.20010208104443.02cca420@router.boolean.net>

At 10.50 -0800 01-02-08, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:

I'm more concerned that
  RFC 1959 doesn't have a header "Obsoleted by: RFC 2255"
and
  RFC 1960 doesn't have a header "Obsoleted by: RFC 2254".

Can these changes be made?


No, RFC's are never changed after publication.

The RFC-Index is what one should look in to get to know the status of a document.

paf

--
Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>       Internet Engineering Task Force
Area Director, Applications Area                   http://www.ietf.org
Phone: (Stockholm) +46-8-4494212            (San Jose) +1-408-525-0940
       PGP: 2DFC AAF6 16F0 F276 7843  2DC1 BC79 51D9 7D25 B8DC

References:
- Re: RFC 1959 to Historic? (revised)
  - From: Mark Wahl <Mark.Wahl@sun.com>
- RFC 1959 to Historic? (revised)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: RFC 1959 to Historic? (revised)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>

Prev by Date: RE: RFC2252 wshp and other ABNF issues
Next by Date: Re: RFC 1959 to Historic? (revised)
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread