Chuck Lever wrote: > On Aug 13, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Michael Ströder wrote: >> Chuck Lever wrote: >>> In order to use the NFS URL format, I think we would be compelled to >>> correct RFC 2224, probably by issuing an RFC that supersedes it. >> >> Why? > > My impression is that may be required by the IETF citation rules. I could > be wrong about that. > >> You could simply use the URL syntax defined in RFC 2224, section 1 (maybe >> redefine it in your own draft) and ignore the WebNFS-related rest of RFC 2224 >> if it does not fit your needs. Maybe some things from section 6 could be also >> considered. But personally I'm not familiar with NFS.. > > We can implement whatever we like (and in fact we did just that in the > current NSDB schema). But there are certain constraints about what may be > specified and referenced in a standards-track document. IMHO it should be ok if you add a clear note about the non-relationship to WebNFS. Maybe others with experience writing I-Ds and bringing them through the RFC process can comment on this. Ciao, Michael.
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature