In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mark-Jason Dominus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RFCs: 21 26 62 84 88 110 112 131 136 137 140 149 162 165 166
>
> These 15 ( 9%) had no IMPLEMENTATION section at all. I was
> surprised that the librarian had even accepted these, since
> that section is not described as 'optional' in the RFC format
> document.
As the author of RFC 136 this is an interesting issue.
I did actually think about this question when writing it, and made
a conscious descision to remove when I realised that, as an suggestion
for an implementation of part of the internals, the DESCRIPTION section
had actually discussed the implementation issues.
In fact I would have thought that for many internals RFCs the whole
topic of the RFC is how to implement something.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.compton.nu/
...I like to enter messages from the Asylum computer.
