Subject: rfc-index corrupt?

From: [email-masked] (Glenn Waters)
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 14:15:10 -0500

here is one line from the rfc-index at
http://ds.internic.net/ds/rfc-index.html:

1034 
  Domain names - concepts and facilities. P.V. Mockapetris. Nov-01-1987.
    (Format: TXT=129180 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC0973, RFC0882, RFC0883)
(Obsoleted 
  by RFC1065, RFC2065) (Updated by RFC1101, RFC1183, RFC1348, RFC1876, 
  RFC1982, RFC2065, RFC2181) (Status: STANDARD) 

for sure the obsoleted by is wrong. among other problems, RFC1065, the
SNMPv1 SMI does not obsolete DNS!

Glenn Waters, Bay Networks, Ottawa, CANADA +1 613 722 1921

---

From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 14:48:57 -0500 (EST)

When RFC 2065 came out, it correctly said on the title page that it updated
RFC 1034 but the RFC index was changed to say that it obsoleted RFC 1034. 
Apparently an effort to fix this glitch in the RFC index resulted in further
problems rather than fixing the original problem. 

Donald

 On Thu, 6 Nov 1997, Glenn Waters wrote:

> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 14:15:10 -0500
> From: Glenn Waters <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: rfc-index corrupt?
> 

=====================================================================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd     +1 978-287-4877(tel)     [email-masked]
   318 Acton Street        +1 978-371-7148(fax)     [email-masked]
Carlisle, MA 01741 USA     +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA)
http://www.cybercash.com           http://www.privacy.org/ipc