Re: I-D expiry [was Re: RFCs vs Standards]

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

 




Hiya,

On 07/12/2024 23:51, Carsten Bormann wrote:
any I-D) being inappropriate to cite

Well, I-Ds truly are not great things to cite because:

- if you only cite the file name(e.g. [1]) then the
content may have changed when the reader gets to it
- if you cite a specific draft number and a newer draft
is ever created the reader won't know which was meant unless
the author called that out, which is extremely rare - much
more common would be that neither author nor reader really
know any of these IETF/I-D minutiae.

I don't think the above is at all affected by supposed
expiry.

I-Ds can be very useful things to reference and some such
references are done well, but most in the academic literature
are done seemingly carelessly or without really understanding
what can change.

S.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-thomson-gendispatch-no-expiry/

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux