[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis

To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
Subject: Re: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:53:57 +0300
Cc: Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com>, "Nelson, David" <dnelson@enterasys.com>, radiusext@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B1550808E4C5@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
References: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B1550808E4C5@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206)

Ok. Here's the issue entry for Bernard's site:

Must Obsolete Old MIBs
Submitter name: Jari Arkko
Submitter email address: Jari.Arkko@piuha.net
Date first submitted: September 15th, 2005
Reference: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2005/msg00853.html
Document: 2618-2621bis
Comment type: E
Priority: S
Section: header
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

The document "Updates RFC 2618" but as far as I
can determine, it contains all the objects from 2618
and then adds some. If so, why isn't the designation
"Obsoletes RFC 2618"?

Requested change:

Change this (or these) documents to obsolete their previous
versions, rather just update them. s/Updates 26/Obsoletes 26/


--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>

References:
- RE: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis
  - From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>

Prev by Date: RE: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis
Next by Date: RE: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis
Previous by thread: RE: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis
Next by thread: RE: REMINDER: Call for review of RFC 2618bis-2621bis
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread