Document management & review (was Re: [dns-wg] RIPE's MNAME recommendation)
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE's MNAME recommendation
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE's MNAME recommendation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Tue Oct 4 12:09:49 CEST 2005
On Oct 4, 2005, at 09:32, Doug Barton wrote: > As long as we're talking about updating 203, I'd also like to take > this > opportunity to point out that the current discussion highlights > some of the > problems with documents of this type, namely that they are > generally out of > date within minutes of being published. Although this is a diversion from the original discussion, I think it's a worthwhile topic for the WG to consider. Maybe the WG could put expiry dates on its documents? ie "This document dies in X years unless it is reviewed and updated if necessary." I'm sure Peter would have made a mental note that 203 would need to be revisited some time after it came out. [Which will explain why it's on the agenda for next week. :-)] Perhaps that could/should be formalised somehow so that some of the WG agenda planning can be done on a longer-term basis?
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE's MNAME recommendation
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE's MNAME recommendation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]