Re: Initial Structure
[email protected] (Chaim Frenkel)
| Newsgroups | perl.bootstrap |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I always was confused by the term RFC (which I thought meant Request for Comment) but it seems it has another meaning to the IETF, a standard. So perhaps we should RFC v1 - Request For Comment Go though the comment phase. RFC v1.1 repeat until ready till STD - Standard. <chaim> >>>>> "SC" == Simon Cozens <[email protected]> writes: SC> On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 06:37:54PM -0400, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote: >> I don't think these final two items belong in the RFC; in the best of >> all possible worlds, this wouldn't even be discussed at the time an RFC >> is created. I feel that an RFC should list issues to be considered in >> implementing a solution, such as scalability and security. >> >> I also think that a justification for the proposed change should be >> part of the RFC. SC> Okay. I'm confused. SC> Are RFCs issued by a group leader, or anyone who feels like? Are RFCs the SC> final considered opinion on an issue, or are they the initial thoughts? SC> How, when, and by whom are they updated? -- Chaim Frenkel Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [email protected] +1-718-236-0183