Hi, On 2011-2-3, at 17:03, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: > While I fully agree with what this document proposes. This might be an > editorial comment but I 've noticed that RFC 1072 is not mentioned to be made > Historic despite the option specified by it is made obsolete.
you mean it's missing from Section 2? Good catch. I'll add that in my working copy. > What is more, referencing all the documents made obsolete normatively is OK? > Here I suggest only RFC 4614 to be mentioned in this way. I guess they could become informative references, but you could also argue that they are required background reading and hence should be normative. Lars
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
