[37657] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: rfc 3091,3092,3098
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (J.D. Falk)
Fri May 18 22:34:56 2001
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:30:29 -0700
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@cybernothing.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Cc: Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com, manros@cp10.es.xerox.com,
esr@thyrsus.com
Message-ID: <20010518193029.O62143@cybernothing.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <3B05D5D3.54BB358A@marconi.com>; from david.charlap@marconi.com on Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:09:23PM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 05/18/01, David Charlap <david.charlap@marconi.com> wrote:
>
> Micah McNelly wrote:
> >
> > I am very unclear about the nature of the following rfcs:
> >
> > 3091 Pi Digit Generation Protocol
> > 3098 How to Advertise Responsibly etc etc.
> > 3092 Etymology of "Foo"
> >
> > Is this some kind of joke? I am seriously confused.
>
> Every year, on April 1st ("April Fool's day"), the IETF approves a small
> number of joke RFCs.
>
> 3098, BTW, is not a joke.
Neither is 3092, for that matter. It may not be about a
serious technical issue, but it's still the answer to a very
common set of questions relating to Internet standards in
general.
Plus, it's a very impressive bit of research.
--
J.D. Falk an ocean refuses no river
<jdfalk@cybernothing.org>
