Julian Reschke wrote: > > I was recently pointed at: > > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#section-4.2>: > > All such URLs, > however, will be removed from the RFC prior to final > publication. > > I have to say that I think that this is very very wrong. It might be worse than that, actually. When RFC-5746 was recently published, the URL from an extremely useful informative reference apparently got stripped by the RFC Editor: draft -03: [Ray09] Ray, M., "Authentication Gap in TLS Renegotiation", November 2009, <http://extendedsubset.com/?p=8>. [SSLv3] Freier, A., Karlton, P., and P. Kocher, "The SSL Protocol Version 3.0", November 1996, <http://www.mozilla.org/ projects/security/pki/nss/ssl/draft302.txt>. RFC-5746: [Ray09] Ray, M., "Authentication Gap in TLS Renegotiation", November 2009, <http://extendedsubset.com/?p=8>. [SSLv3] Freier, A., Karlton, P., and P. Kocher, "The SSL Protocol Version 3.0", Work in Progress, November 1996. But not only the URL was stripped, also the reference was changed to a "Work in Progress" -- because that document happens to be still formatted as a long expired I-D (both, the original authors and TLS WG forgot to ask for publication as an information RFC). Curiously, I did complain that the I-D marking and expiration was never removed from this document, pointing out that some folks may not believe that this is not the real/final SSLv3 spec -- and was assured by several others that this would not happen. Looks like it happened to the RFC Editor... :-( -Martin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf