Robert Story wrote: > On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:08:19 -0400 G. wrote: > GSM> the benefit of shipping the RFCs is mostly convenience as they can be > GSM> retrieved elsewhere...of course we should strive to have this element of > GSM> the documentation be as accurate updated as possible...why would anyone > GSM> want the original vs. the patched? > > Most people don't even realize the errata exists. So if you go about saying > "RFC XXXX says 'blah'", and 'blah' was part of the errata, then others whoe > only have the original RFC (most people) are going to be confused or think you > are an idiot.
I think I still vote 4) ... one of the very reasons being that some people don't know the errata exists...and I don't think anyone we care about will think we are idiots for quoting/publishing the the most accurate updated text rather than something older. others? let's decide somehow before I forget I was going to do this :) > > GSM> When the ietf publishes them...the contain all errata to date no? > > No. The IETF does not republish w/out changing the RFC number. As this is a > cumbersome process, it is only done for big problems. > aha... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
