What's the difference between "obsoletes" and "updates" in RFC's? -


the rfc-editor says

  • "obsoletes xxxx" refers other rfcs 1 replaces.
  • "updates xxxx" refers other rfcs 1 merely updates not replace.

but begs question... why rfc update rfc without replacing it?

does "updates" mean earlier information contradicted in older rfc, other information still standard? seems odd.

“updates xxxx” adds definitions existing rfc. content of existing rfc not invalidated new rfc , still needed implement protocol. used example if there no need redefine complete protocol clarifications required.

“obsoletes xxxx” complete redefinitio of protocol. if not other reasons, there no need read obsoleted rfc understand/correctly implement protocol.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

1111. appearing after print sequence - php -

java - WARN : org.springframework.web.servlet.PageNotFound - No mapping found for HTTP request with URI [/board/] in DispatcherServlet with name 'appServlet' -

Ruby on Rails, ActiveRecord, Postgres, UTF-8 and ASCII-8BIT encodings -