Re: names of RFC references (was: models-09 comments)

[Mark Smith <mcs@pearlcrescent.com>]

Roger Harrison wrote:
> I haven't seen any further comments on this subject, so I'll jump in. 
> I've attempted to at least make AuthMeth consistent with itself and with 
> Protocol in the -10 draft by using descriptive names for all references.
>  
> I had assumed that since we are using descriptive names for the LDAP TS 
> that it would make sense to use them everywhere. I realize that the RFC 
> editor could replace descriptive names of LDAP TS  docs with their RFCs 
> as the RFC numbers are assigned, but I'd prefer leaving descriptive 
> names throughout.

I like descriptive names.  On the other hand, [RFC####] names are very 
precise.  I think everyone agress that we should be consistent across 
all of the LDAPBIS documents.  Someone should just decide which approach 
we will use ;-)

-Mark