Actually, www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc<num>.txt is probably a better long term normative reference for documents in the RFC series.
Mike Sent from my iPad > On Jan 7, 2015, at 00:06, Jamil Nimeh <jamil.j.ni...@oracle.com> wrote: > > I did a similar doc bug fix in the past and one of the comments suggested > using the tools variant of the RFC page. The table of contents links and > links to errata and so forth are nice. So I figured I'd do the same thing > here as last time. If it's a problem I can switch back to the ASCII version. > > --Jamil > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Xuelei Fan <xuelei....@oracle.com> > Date: 01/06/2015 7:24 PM (GMT-08:00) > To: security-dev@openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: RFR [JDK-9]: JDK-8058912 : Broken link (access denied error) to > http://www.rsasecurity.com in RC5ParameterSpec class summary > > Looks fine to me. > > Just curious, why update the link of > "http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2040.txt";? The link works. > > Thanks, > Xuelei > > On 1/7/2015 10:59 AM, Jamil Nimeh wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > This is a quick fix to deal with a broken link for the RC5ParameterSpec > > javadoc. > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8058912 > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jnimeh/reviews/8058912/webrev.01/ > > > > Thanks! > > --Jamil >
