Subject: RE: Archives of WGs that are no longer active

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:03:28 -0600

> > More specifically does anyone know what WG produced RFC2396
> > (Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax)
> 
> Wouldn't it be nice if every RFC that was the product of a WG simply
> said so?

Could'nt agree more. I think that would be a nice feature. While it is
true that WGs have a limited scope and lifetime, the historical value
that is added is useful. The current statement in the RFCs which says
Network Working Group has little or no value (at least to me).

> Kireeti.
> -------

-Basavaraj

---

From: Aaron Falk <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:10:25 -0800

There's a list for discussions of this nature.
See http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest.

--aaron