IETF-SSH archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
still need review of normative vs. non-normative reference split.
Nobody got back to me from this request:
> Latest nit from the AD's on core documents: need to separate normative
> and non-normative references, per http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html
>
> I'd appreciate it if a couple people could play "spot the
> non-normative references" in the current drafts and share their
> results with me and/or the WG. (I've done a quick look myself; the
> vast majority are normative).
>
> There will be a document re-spin after this exercise.
>
> Thank you for your assistance.
here's my take. Anyone disagree with the categorization?
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-assignednumbers-01.txt:
All references are normative. (FIPS-46-3 in this context is a
"historic normative")
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-architecture-13.txt
Non-normative:
RFC854 (telnet)
RFC894 (IP over Ethernet)
RFC1134 (PPP)
RFC1232 (rlogin)
(the above are refereced as part of an analsis of
relative protocol overhead.)
All others are normative; note that I think RFC1766 has been
superceded.
nits: references from text are [RFC-NNN]; references section
has [RFCNNN].
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-connect-16.txt
All normative
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-transport-15.txt
Non-normative:
[Orm96] (nit: typo in the reference)
references rfc1766 (superceded)
apparently unused:
rfc2459
rfc1034
there are references to Applied Cryptography for several
algorithms.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-userauth-16.txt
All normative.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index