[156172] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Masataka Ohta)
Mon Sep 10 16:53:49 2012
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:51:53 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <504DE7CA.80803@foobar.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Nick Hilliard wrote:
>>> Just because something is documented in RFC does not automatically make it a
>>> standard, nor does it necessarily make anyone care.
>>
>> That's not a valid argument against text in the RFC proof read by
>> the RFC editor as the evidence of established terminology of the
>> Internet community.
>
> you may want to read rfc 1796, and then retract what you said because it
> sounds silly.
Anything written in RFC1796 should be ignored, because RFC1796, an
informational, not standard track, RFC, states so.
Or, is it time to retract your silliness?
Masataka Ohta
