Mukesh, Well, let me try again, we often have documents that update only part of the earlier document.
In this case, we need people to know when the see RFC 2780 in the index that there is another RFC that modifies some of its content. If this isn't done, they'll pick up RFC 2780 and be misled into asking for the RFC 2780 rules for ICMPv6. This causes delay and problems until they get straightened out to get to the right rules for ICMPv6. If you look at the RFC Editor definition for Updates, it does not say how much of the RFC has to be updated (see below). > RFC 2780 provides guidelines for more than ICMP (IPv4, IPv6, > TCP, UDP) and this ICMPv6 draft updates only section 6 and 7=20 > (ICMP). So will it not be wrong to say that this spec updates > 2780. What if someone was looking to do a registry action > about TCP and they looked at the index and looked at the > note that 2780 has been updated by this spec and couldn't > find guidelines for TCP in this spec ? > > Am I making my concern clear ? > The RFC Editor has the following formal rule (in their almost approved draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-08.txt) Updates Specifies an earlier document whose contents are modified or augmented by the new document. The new document cannot be used alone, it can only be used in conjunction with the earlier document. This says nothing about how much or how little of the earlier document the new document updates. Does this give you enough help on the update point? Margaret, this ok? Allison -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
