Re: BIND vs RFC3253

Ted Hardie wrote:

> In general, I don't see much of a problem with indicating that a spec
> like this "updates" a previous document even if the document doesn't
> change specific items in the previous document.  Speaking personally,
> when I see "updates", I take it as "read both".  The contrast is, obviously,
> with "supersedes" which implies one can/should read only the second
> document. 
> 
> Just my take on it,
> 			regards,
> 				Ted Hardie

And "read both" is what I'd really like to express. Geoff?


-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760