On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:45 AM Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Feb 19, 2020, at 02:23, Daniel Lublin <daniel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Good day, > > I'm not entirely convinced of keeping a list of implementations in an RFC. > But since the information is there, let's at least have it corrected and > updated upon publishing. > > > There shouldn’t be. See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7942 > > which clearly states: > > > Since this information is necessarily time dependent, it is > inappropriate for inclusion in a published RFC. The authors should > include a note to the RFC Editor requesting that the [implementation] section be > removed before publication. I could have sworn that note appears in the draft in Section 8, and looking at the file it indeed does. > > > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > ntp mailing list > ntp@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp -- "Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains". --Rousseau. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
