This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/

[ipv6-wg] RIPE 554 Errata Page

Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE 554 Errata Page
Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE 554 Errata Page

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Sander Steffann sander at steffann.nl
Mon May 27 00:07:51 CEST 2013

Hi Peter,

>> anything in the document without getting a new RIPE document number. But 
>> having to many different versions of the document confuses our audience.
> 
> why is the audience less confused by the same number referencing different
> content?

This is about 'same content, but with typo's fixed', not about completely new content. If the content changes then I agree we need a new number. Otherwise we end up with references like 'RIPE-554, the version just before they replaced RFC xxxx with RFC yyyy'.

Companies must still be able to say things like 'our products comply to RIPE-554' without any confusion.

Cheers,
Sander

Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE 554 Errata Page
Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE 554 Errata Page

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ ipv6-wg Archives ]