Retirement of the RFC xx99 series

2013-12-12 Thread RFC Series Editor
As mentioned on 8 October 2013 (see
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg11978.html),
the RFC Editor has proposed to retire the practice of publishing RFCs
xx99.  Based on the feedback received, this action is now formally
concluded and these documents will no longer be created and published. 
This has also been noted on the RFC Editor News page (see November 2013
news highlights - http://www.rfc-editor.org/news.html).

If you have any questions regarding this action, please post to the
rfc-inter...@rfc-editor.org.

Thank you for your time and interest,
Heather Flanagan, RSE


The RFC xx99 Series

2013-10-08 Thread RFC Series Editor
Greetings,

The RFC Editor is proposing to retire the practice of publishing RFCs
xx99, the Request for Comments Summary for RFC Numbers xx00-xx99.  In
December 1991, RFC 1099 was the first Request for Comments Summary
RFC published.  It provides a list of document titles, authors, date
of publication, and abstracts for each of the RFCs published in the
range 1000 - 1099.  Since that time, through the time that RFC 3299
was published, a new summary RFC was published every 100 RFCs, and RFC
numbers ending with 99 were reserved for these summary documents.  RFC
3399 was never published (for various reasons), though RFCs 3499 and
3599 were.  RFC 3599 was the last of these summary documents to be
published in December 2003.

These snapshots are no longer needed because up-to-date data is
available online.  RFC abstracts are available using the RFC search
engine (http://www.rfc-editor.org/search/rfc_search.php) and they are
included in rfc-index.xml.  RFCs xx99 summaries were never requested by
the Internet Community and are not currently filling a need; therefore,
the RFC Editor is retiring the publication of the RFC summary documents.
RFC numbers typically reserved for these documents (i.e., numbers
ending with 99) may be assigned to future RFCs.

If there are any concerns about this course of action, please comment by
October 18, 2013, on the rfc-inter...@rfc-editor.org mailing list.

Thank you,
Heather Flanagan, RSE