Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
> Joe Touch wrote:
> ...
> > > Speaking of keeping standards, I am wondering why STD-2
> > > is still RFC-1700, although the current version is kept by
> > > IANA at http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm .
> >
> > Very good question. I'll be glad to raise the issue with IANA;
> > at least 1700 and STD-2 should be obsoleted in their current form.
>
> afaik nothing in 1700 has been rescinded, so it isn't obsolete;
> it's simply updated by http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm
I was using the term 'obsolete' as in 'obsoleted by',
as used in other standards that have been updated by
subsequent RFCs.
> IANA can't change the status of an STD - that's an IESG action.
> If you think this matters, I would raise it with the latter.
Agreed.
I was expecting that IANA would initiate taking the action with
the IESG, not that they would supercede it.
Joe
