Prepare final RFC references

[dontcallmedom]

Based on expected numbers in https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C238

ReSpec will complain about the RFCs until specref picks the latest number (hopefully shortly after they get published).

This shouldn't be merged until the RFCs have been published

---

Preview | Diff

[fluffy]

@dontcallmedom , do you want me to check that all the refs got changed to the correct RFC number or are you pretty sure you got that right ?

[dontcallmedom]

@fluffy if you can give a look at the change, that would be much appreciated; I double checked but I wouldn't want to get this wrong :)

[aboba]

@dontcallmedom We noticed that a number of the references have been switched from normative to non-normative. Is this intentional?

[jan-ivar]

For example, bundle is no longer listed under normative references

[dontcallmedom]

I think you're mis-reading the diff - BUNDLE no longer appears as BUNDLE but as RFC8843 (which is still under the normative reference section )

[jan-ivar]

Nevermind, it's listed as [RFC8843] instead now. The normative list is sorted, so the rename made it look like things were removed rather than changed.

[dontcallmedom]

Note that we used to mistakenly have two names to refer to the same spec (SDP-SIMULCAST and MMUSIC-SIMULCAST), one listed in informative references and the other in normative references - they're recognized as a single spec listed in normative in this pull request

[henbos]

Same question in 47 places

[dontcallmedom]

@jan-ivar @aboba @henbos anything holding up merging this?

[fluffy]

Thank you all for getting this sorted out so quickly