I do recall, but we are no longer using those properties in the same way- they have been modified; and so the text is no longer accurate. Also my comments were and are as an individual during the community comment phase.

Eliot

On 17.06.2025 15:42, Jay Daley wrote:
Eliot

On 4 Jun 2025, at 11:38, Eliot Lear<[email protected]> wrote:
The Chapeau in Section 7 now looks a little funny, and historically wrong, 
given that we appear to be changing history.  To this end, I suggest the 
following changes:
OLD:
7. Historical Properties of the RFC Series
NEW:
7. Properties of the RFC Series
OLD:
This section lists some of the properties that have been historically
regarded as important to the RFC Series.
NEW:
This section lists some of the properties that are
regarded as important to the RFC Series.
You may not recall, but the existing language was a careful compromise 
reflecting some very different views on the applicability of these properties.  
There were a number who strongly disagreed with these properties as things to 
maintain going forward and so the wording was chosen to reflect that these 
properties, while once considered important, no longer had consensus.  In that 
context, changing this in the RSAB stage of processing is quite problematic.

Jay

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to