> So basically, the all text format of RFCs is the least of their problems.
try reading specs that are from 3gpp, and then you would realize the bastion of clarity that is ietf. and the format of 3gpp specs is ms-word (yes you read that right), there is zero hyper-linking across various specs, finding how something works etc. is a matter of opening up at least 3-5 documents, and have a standards guy next to you to make sense of it all...
I was going to make this exact comment. I've been working on implementing part of the 3GPP diameter protocols, and they are an absolute nightmare in comparison to reading RFCs. So many documents that mostly repeat what other documents say, adding a small piece of information here and there with hundreds of cross-references, in a completely unreadable format.
As for the ms-word-ness, I recommend this site for PDF versions of the documents [1]. Just bask in the ridiculous amount of versions and documents in that list and be happy that RFCs are at least human-readable and in a standardized format...
oh dear lord! diameter is totally insane. other than the base protocol, everything else e.g. the gx, s6 specs are impossible to decipher. with multiple versions etc. things are even more insane, and hunting down for duffs boils down following the cr's for the version. aghhh! I have been using the above site that you mentioned, but it still doesn't take the pain away...
try reading specs that are from 3gpp, and then you would realize the bastion of clarity that is ietf. and the format of 3gpp specs is ms-word (yes you read that right), there is zero hyper-linking across various specs, finding how something works etc. is a matter of opening up at least 3-5 documents, and have a standards guy next to you to make sense of it all...