Thank you. The reason is that some summaries pull the Abstract, and this provides linkage.
Russ On Feb 27, 2011, at 6:45 AM, Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote: > OK, We will add a sentence like “This document obsoletes RFC 4742.” to the > abstract. > > Cheers, > Mehmet > > From: ext Scott W Brim [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 10:41 PM > To: Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich) > Cc: gen-art; ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan); ext Bert (IETF) Wijnen; > [email protected] > Subject: RE: gen-art telechat review of draft-ietf-netconf-rfc4742bis-07 > > I guess at some point someone who deals with standards track docs wanted it > mentioned in the abstract as well. Whatever you and the experts all decide is > fine with me. > > Scott > > [Sent from my mobile.] > > On Feb 26, 2011 3:26 PM, "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Scott, > > > > the header actually indicates clearly that this draft "Obsoletes: 4742". > > > > I am not really sure why the additional statement is necessary. > > > > Cheers, > > Mehmet Ersue > > (Document shepherd) > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: ext Scott W Brim [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 3:18 PM > >> To: gen-art; [email protected]; Ersue, > >> Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich) > >> Subject: gen-art telechat review of draft-ietf-netconf-rfc4742bis-07 > >> > >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on > >> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > >> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > >> > >> Please wait for direction from your document shepherd > >> or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > >> > >> Document: draft-ietf-netconf-4742bis-07 > >> Reviewer: Scott Brim > >> Review Date: 2011-02-26 > >> IETF LC End Date: 2011-02-16 > >> IESG Telechat date: 2011-03-03 > >> > >> Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits > >> that should be fixed before publication. > >> > >> Major issues: > >> > >> Minor issues: > >> > >> One IDnit, which is a good idea: "The draft header indicates that this > >> document obsoletes RFC4742, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention > >> this, which it should." > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
