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

Re: Demoting rfc2223bis to an informative reference

To: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Demoting rfc2223bis to an informative reference
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:17:50 +0100
Cc: "Mreview (E-mail)" <mreview@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10501100341300.25011-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>
Mail-followup-to: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>, "Mreview (E-mail)" <mreview@ops.ietf.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10501100341300.25011-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>
Reply-to: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i

On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 03:43:58AM -0800, C. M. Heard wrote:
> MIB Doctors:
> 
> Bert has already looked over the following.  If I hear no objections
> the proposed modifications will appear in the next spin.

Can someone explain why a reference to RFC2223bis is bad while a 
reference to a URL is good? (Sorry for being so ignorant.)

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

References:
- Demoting rfc2223bis to an informative reference
  - From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>

Prev by Date: RE: comment on draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-03.txt (fwd)
Next by Date: RE: Demoting rfc2223bis to an informative reference
Previous by thread: Demoting rfc2223bis to an informative reference
Next by thread: RE: Demoting rfc2223bis to an informative reference
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread