Subject: RE: [IETF] Comments for Humorous RFCs or uncategorised RFCs or dated?April the first Date: Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:59:30AM +0000 Quoting Yoav Nir (ynir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > I mostly share the sentiment that this is just humor, so what's the harm. > > That said, I did at one point have to exercise my diplomatic skills when I got forwarded a customer (nameless here for evermore) question about whether support for RFC 3514 was on our roadmap. On that subject, April 1 RFCen in call for tender, I'd argue that they serve a purpose. If an April 1 RFC is included in MUST or SHOULD -- a clued supplier will have staff that get the joke and reply with "only on April 1" or similar. A box-ticking "let's hope they don't test this" lying bastard will just check it and pull their pants down in public. > While the people on this list generally "get" the joke, not all readers of RFCs are part of this group. The recent RFC 6919 is full of in-jokes (or perhaps, in-roast?) that many outside the IETF will not get. Anyways, it is an issue, but I think these are too much fun to do away with them. I do not want code or devices from people that don't "get" it in my network. The April 1 series are useful documents. -- Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668 So this is what it feels like to be potato salad
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature