develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000

Re: Initial Structure

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Chaim Frenkel
Date:
July 26, 2000 18:04
Subject:
Re: Initial Structure
Message ID:
m37la8e62z.fsf@csamnycln01.nyc.csam.com
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 <simon@cozens.net> 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.
chaimf@pobox.com				               +1-718-236-0183

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About