> Date: 2005-08-28 20:33 > From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@xxxxxxxxx> > However, RFC 2026 does not set the rules for > non-standards track documents, as it explicitly says in Section > 2.1. Sorry, I don't see that anywhere in 2.1. 2.1 does say that non-standards track specifications are not subject to the rules for standardization (as in full Standard), but it goes on to point to the rules in 4.2 for Informational and Experimental RFCs. > There is a precedent, by the way: RFC 2341. Note that it postdates > RFC 2026. Interesting. Are there any others? I have heard that an effort to publish a particular obsolete specification as Historic received strong pushback, with the recommendation for publication as Informational. Aside from the label -- and that's not a clear benefit because Historic is ambiguous -- I don't see much difference between Historic and an Informational RFC with a suitable IESG note (a "warning label" if you will). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf