[Old-standards] Example web page...

[Eliot Lear]

James Carlson wrote:

> Indeed.  I'm surprised to see it on this list.  Actually, I'm
> surprised by a number of things on this list.

Remember, the list started with EVERY RFC before RFC 2000 that is marked 
as Proposed Standard and NOT already obsoleted by another document.  It 
was a programmatic operation.

> 
> RFCs 1144 (VJ compression) and 1962 (Compression Control Protocol) are
> also fundamental to many PPP links and shouldn't be here.

Removed.

> 
> I believe that RFCs 1377 (OSINLCP) and 1378 (ATCP) are also in use,
> though, arguably, AppleTalk is going away faster.  You need RFC 1377
> if you're going to run IS-IS over PPP links.

I've removed RFC 1377, and I would prefer a more authoritative statement 
about RFC 1378.  Should I remove it or not?

> 
> I don't know what the value of RFCs 1471-1474 (PPP MIBs) might be, but
> they're they only MIBs that exist for PPP.

Are they implemented and widely deployed?

> 
> RFC 1663 is fairly widely implemented, though I have no idea how
> important is.  RFCs 1968 and 1973 are also implemented, but, again I'm
> not sure how important they are for the future.

I've removed RFC 1663 but left the gist of your question in the comment. 
  Same for RFCs 1968 and 1973.

> 
> RFC 1256 (router discovery) is widely implemented and used.

As I am acting as an editor only right now, I've removed RFC 1256, but 
as a mailing list member, this is one I'd like to come back to later. 
Is it really widely used?  For what?  By whom?  Anyway...

>  I think
> RPC (RFCs 1831 and 1833) are still widely used.

removed.

> 
> Aren't RFC 885 EOR and RFC 1041 regime used for TN3270?

Same as earlier.  Should I remove these or not?  Is there a good mailing 
list to query?

> 
> It has never seemed to me that RFC 1618 documented reality.  So I
> guess I wouldn't be sad to see it become Historic.

Changes will be reflected by the end of the day.  Please apprise me of 
any corrections.

Eliot