Bob Braden wrote:
*> *> *> Bob Braden wrote:
*> *> > *> *> > *> And what happens when a STD is updated/revised?
*> > *> *> > *> Joe
*> > *> > Joe,
*> > *> > Unnnh, let me guess. Update the web pointer to the new RFC(s)?
*> > *> > Bob Braden
*> *> I was thinking of the case where
*> *> 791 -> STD3
*> *> In which case when STD3 points to a new RFC, papers citing STD3 would be *> wrong.
*>
If a paper is citing RFC 793 because it wants to cite the standard spec for TCP, then citing STD3 is exactly the right thing to do. I would submit that this is nearly always the case. It it relatively rare that a TCP citation depends upon some particular wording or content of the a particular (obsolete) RFC.
*> STD numbers have dynamic content - as you mention above. Which is why *> the RFC number (which never changes) is what should be cited.
*> *> Joe
No, it is STDs that have static meaning; RFCs can change.
Bob
Then requests for an RFC should _never_ redirect to a STD (which was where I was going, BTW), but it's OK for the STD to redirect to the current RFC (or set thereof, if multiples).
In that case, redirection isn't as simple as an HTTP redirect, since there are several STDs which would point to mulitple RFCs.
Joe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf