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

Re: Formality: References from std-track to BCP

To: harald@alvestrand.no, narten@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Formality: References from std-track to BCP
From: Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:12:14 -0500 (EST)
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <200303041405.h24E5x45012228@rotala.raleigh.ibm.com>

> RFC 2026 just neglected  to get this part right. I suspect it was an
> omission, rather than intention.

correct - teh 2026 editor (who was involved in getting BCP as a RFC type)
has always seen BCP as a "full standard" for non-techhnology topics
and thus is fine for a reference from any level of stds track RFC
but he omitted saying that in 2026

Scott

References:
- Re: Formality: References from std-track to BCP
  - From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>

Prev by Date: Revised charter: IPv6
Next by Date: RE: Last Call: Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS vto Proposed Standard
Previous by thread: Re: Formality: References from std-track to BCP
Next by thread: Revised charter: IPv6
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread