On 2015-01-02 18:10, Nico Williams wrote:
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 11:04:55AM -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
Let's just recognize that making rules retroactive to a 40+ year
old spec is not likely to be fruitful. [...]
+1. Especially given how useful RFC 20 is.
Let's demonstrate agility and pragmatism here. Promote RFC 20 after a
small effort to ascertain the RFC-Editor's current electronic version's
faithfulness to such "original" paper copies as might be found. Or even
*without* such an effort: publish any errors found later as errata and
call it a day.
So we're supposed to make a decision over a document we currently can't see?
Best regards, Julian