On Mar 24, 2014 5:49 AM, "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzme...@nic.fr> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:49:10AM +0800, > Jiankang Yao <ya...@cnnic.cn> wrote > a message of 116 lines which said: > > > since there are thousands of RFCs, > > IMHO, the work should be indexed by PROTOCOL not by RFC, since some > protocols are specified in many RFCs (DNS...)
The unit of specification is the RFC, so shouldn't that be the main key for indexing? We have a dropdown for IETF area -- we could use another field, text, for affected protocols. Your ticket #8 is good for showing "intention". I hadn't thought of using initial entries like that, and it's an intriguing idea. I think I'm in favor. However, when you do an actual review, could you either modify your existing entry or add a new one for each specific RFC? Scott
_______________________________________________ ietf-privacy mailing list ietf-privacy@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
