> PS - is no one else alarmed by the re-publishing of material > submitted under an explicit agreement for 'removal after 6 mos'? Yes. More generally the presumption that RFC doesn't mean "Request for Comments" and that the explicit withdrawal of the preliminary form has been over-ridden by a claim for third-party archival persistence. Eric
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material RJ Atkinson
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Randy Bush
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Harald Alvestrand
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Pete Loshin
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Dave Crocker
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Jon Crowcroft
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Joe Touch
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Keith Moore
- RE: An Internet Draft as reference material Christian Huitema
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Eric Brunner-Williams
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Randy Bush
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Greg Minshall
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Tim Salo
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Bill Manning
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Scott Bradner
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Keith Moore
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Jeffrey Mogul
- Re: An Internet Draft as reference material Steven M. Bellovin