>maybe we need a FAC (Frequently Argued Controversies) file for the >IETF list. unlike an FAQ file which answers questions, an FAC file >would summarize each side of each argument. that way, we wouldn't >need to re-iterate those positions each time the topic came back >up - we could simply say "see [url]". Or, more likely, "RTFF." ;-) RGF
- I-D archives available anywhe... Pekka Savola
- Re: I-D archives availab... Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: I-D archives availab... Scott Bradner
- Re: I-D archives availab... Vernon Schryver
- Re: I-D archives ava... Ofer Inbar
- Re: I-D archives ava... Keith Moore
- Re: I-D archives... grenville armitage
- Re: I-D archives... Jiwoong Lee
- Re: I-D archives... Peter Deutsch
- Re: I-D archives availab... Robert G. Ferrell
- Re: I-D archives availab... Robert G. Ferrell
- Re: I-D archives availab... Radia Perlman - Boston Center for Networking
- Re: I-D archives ava... vint cerf
- Re: I-D archives... Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim
- Re: I-D archives availab... James P. Salsman
- RE: I-D archives availab... Ian King
