Keith, Joel,
It's difficult to imagine that these things could be adequately captured
in a static document, for TCP or any other protocol, because new threats
and countermeasures continue to be identified decades after the base
protocol is well-settled. Maybe something like an expanded version of
the RFC Editor's errata pages would be more appropriate?
One might imagine an informational document which was routinely
obsoleted by future iterations. Keeping it tractable is a product of
necessarily limiting the scope.
I am in favor of publishing things like these in informational RFCs. And
no, we should not shoot for completeness, for obvious reasons.
Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf