RFCs. For everything under the sun.

I've gotten myself deeper into terminologies than I wanted to, and found myself reading RFC 5462, after searching google for MPLS V(PN)RF definition - only to have the terminology tipped on it's head, in my mind.

So enjoying reading a RFC that, afterwards I find myself saying "What the hell did I just read?"

I guess the topic is the benefits of reading RFCs, How much benefit does someone (Who knows Nil about a topic) get about reading RFCs about the topic?

Turgon, I blame you.

Find more posts tagged with

SAVE $250 on Your CISCO Boot Camp — Use Code "EXAM26"

Exclusively for TechExams members for Infosec Boot Camps starting before April 30, 2026

View CISCO Boot Camps

Comments

Turgon

Roguetadhg wrote: »

I've gotten myself deeper into terminologies than I wanted to, and found myself reading RFC 5462, after searching google for MPLS V(PN)RF definition - only to have the terminology tipped on it's head, in my mind.

So enjoying reading a RFC that, afterwards I find myself saying "What the hell did I just read?"

I guess the topic is the benefits of reading RFCs, How much benefit does someone (Who knows Nil about a topic) get about reading RFCs about the topic?

Turgon, I blame you.

Its about standards and protocol developments. Most IT professionals today avoid RFCs. Back in the day it was where one can see how challenges in the networked world are developed and met. The IETF remains active. From about 1993 - 2003 we saw at least many CCIE candidates reading RFCs and subscribing to mailing lists and contributing. Today, sadly very little. It's a shame because we see fewer IT professionals who are actively engaged in the field getting involved in the process to develop standards. Therefore, we will collect a paycheck, play WoW, and do what we are told by global corporations, and the government.

ChooseLife

How much benefit does someone (Who knows Nil about a topic) get about reading RFCs about the topic?

I think it comes down to preferences on the format in which people want to receive information. I personally like it to be short, concise, and clear, and I find myself enjoying RFCs when learning a new standard and using them as a preferred source of answers. Textbooks using examples such as "Imagine ABC protocol is your local laundromat and XYZ datagram is a basket with squirrels" tend to drive me crazy... Existence of these books, however, suggests that some people may prefer information translated to non-technical language, explained, and commented.

Today, sadly very little.

One reason may be that initially the IS field attracted mostly technically-minded people, but over the years became a babylonian bazaar filled with people pursuing "the career" for all kinds of personal motives...