Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 09:49:20 -0700 From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> To: EKR <ekr@rtfm.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 127/8 continued Message-ID: <200109271649.f8RGnKk00648@ptavv.es.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "27 Sep 2001 09:49:41 PDT." <kjn13glgt6.fsf@romeo.rtfm.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Sender: ekr@rtfm.com > From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> > Date: 27 Sep 2001 09:49:41 -0700 > > "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> writes: > > Yes, many RFCs do describe APIs and lots of other things that are > > limited to a host, but none are standards track RFCs. All are > > informational or BCP or something of that sort. RFCs can be on most any > > subject (and some are very far field), but none of those are standards > > track (Proposed Standard, Draft Standard, Standard, ...). > This isn't actually correct. > > See for instance, > RFC 2853 -- Generic Security Service API Version 2 : Java Bindings > RFC 2744 -- Generic Security Service API Version 2 : C Bindings Eric, I stand corrected! I am also very surprised to see that as an Internet Standard (or on its way to being one). Sorry to have doubted Werner. (And I should know better.) Can we now return to relevant content? (I'm so embarrassed to have helped drag this relevant discussion to where it never belonged.) R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200109271649.f8RGnKk00648>