Re: Pre-IETF RFCs to Historic (not really proposing)

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

 



Hi Keith,

--On September 16, 2011 10:10:06 AM -0400 Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I think we need a low-overhead and relatively informal mechanism of
reporting errata and requesting clarifications, and maybe that it should
be expanded a bit to serve as an implementation and interoperability
reporting mechanism.  But I don't think that having such a mechanism
requires us to maintain expertise in every subject matter area covered by
every RFC.

Again I would like to bring up the idea of every RFC having an associated wiki page(s). The goal here is to provide a way for implementors to add comments, annotations, clarifications, corrections etc to augment the RFCs. Whilst such commentary can often be found on IETF mailing lists after an RFC is published locating those and searching them can be tedious - plus the full history of discussion on various points is often not relevant to an implementor - all they need to know is what is the correct way to do it now.

Doing something like this would obviously require some investment in additional infrastructure. There are also questions about how we would maintain the integrity of the information on the wiki pages, but I think those are things we can easily address.

--
Cyrus Daboo

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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