Hi Les and all, > On Jun 13, 2022, at 2:22 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > So you are suggesting that we publish something that was never actually > published as an RFC as a "historic RFC"? > > The logic of that escapes me.
It so happens I recently became aware that this publication track is explicitly considered to be OK. https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/designating-rfcs-historic-2014-07-20/ sez "An RFC may be published directly as Historic, with no earlier status to change (see, for example, RFC 4870). This is usually done to document ideas that were considered and discarded, or protocols that were already historic when it was decided to document them. Those publications are handled as are any other RFCs.” $0.02, —John _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
