-05 (and whatever gets decided on the registry non-technical field
length limits) addresses all my comments.
RjS
On Dec 10, 2008, at 6:21 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:
On 2008-12-10, at 10:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I fixed the references to obsolete standards.
You fixed some, but not all. I'll leave the following (edited) RFC
Editor Note in place: "Please make the following replacements to the
document references: RFC2960 -> RFC4960, RFC1831 -> draft-ietf-nfsv4-
rfc1831bis"
As an FYI, I have been relying
on rfc-editor.org check if RFC numbers were obsolete or not. It did
not
classify several RFCs as obsolete.
The missing case was RFC793 obsoleting RFC675; the other ones were
there. I asked the RFC Editor to add that.
Lars
PS: Robert, we can continue the discussion of your gen-art review
while this document enters IESG
Evaluation._______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art