[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt

To: "'joel jaeggli'" <joelja@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Scott Brim'" <scott.brim@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
From: "Adrian Farrel" <afarrel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:38:40 +0100
Cc: "'Barry Leiba'" <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'ietf'" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>, "'Abdussalam Baryun'" <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <501A8B5B.2070609@bogus.com>
Reply-to: afarrel@xxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AQLw+3MjyVCsgx/3v7ilGpHvBIxheAJ4IDYAAngh6QwBuKimbQKXHalqlLWRm9A=

> A Change to the interpretation of normative language does not
> retroactively apply to existing documents.

Shucks! Really?

I was hoping I could automatically change the behavior of deployed routers by
updating the meaning of some words in published RFCs. You mean I can't do that?

A

References:
- Fwd: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
  - From: Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
  - From: Barry Leiba
- Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
  - From: Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
  - From: Scott Brim
- Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
  - From: joel jaeggli

Prev by Date: Re: RFC Errata: when to file, and when not to
Next by Date: Re: [OPSAWG] Basic ietf process question ...
Previous by thread: Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
Next by thread: Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[IETF Annoucements] [IETF Obscurity Interest] [IETF] [IP Storage] [Yosemite News] [Linux] [Pilates] [Linux SCTP] [Linux Newbies] [Fedora Users]