RE: Progression of normative references

["Ryan Moats" <rmoats@coreon.com>]

My memory (admittedly fuzzy, I was in the back typing madly to
fix a systems issue) is that if these references are short
(i.e. attribute references) they should just be restated in 
the documents, with appropriate verbage.

Ryan

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
[mailto:owner-ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Kurt D. Zeilenga
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2000 6:55 AM
To: Leif Johansson
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
Subject: Re: Progression of normative references 


At 09:36 AM 8/9/00 +0200, Leif Johansson wrote:
>> Of course, we still must deal with dozen or so normative
>> references to LDAPv2 and X.500 RFCs.
>
>Did we reach a consensus on removing the X.500 references
>and writing up the LDAP information model independent of X.500?

I believe there was general consensus that references to X.500
documents should be more specific.

I was actually referring to the various references to X.500
RFCs (ie: non-LDAP specific) such as RFC 1274 which need either
be progressed, cut, or absorbed.

Kurt