----- Original Message -----
From: "Lixia Zhang" <lixia(_at_)cs(_dot_)ucla(_dot_)edu>
To: "Bob Braden" <braden(_at_)isi(_dot_)edu>
Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 10:08 PM
On Jan 6, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Bob Braden wrote:
Historic might imply that they were once in service, but have later been
replaced/deprecated. In fact, these protocols were always, and are still,
*experimental*. It would seem logical to assign them the Experimental category
and be done with it.
Bob Braden
I would like to second Bob's position here.
as a co-author for NETBLT (RFC998): NETBLT was out of a research effort to
answer the question: can we *fully* utilize long delay, high bandwidth (and
potentially error prone) networks? NETBLT says and here is one way to do it.
Over the years (it's published in 1987) I have received comments from many
people saying that they learned something interesting or even useful from
NETBLT. The NETBLT paper (SIGCOMM 1987) got cited over 200 times.
As RFC998 stated clearly:
This document is published for discussion and comment, and does not
constitute a standard. The proposal may change and certain parts of
the protocol have not yet been specified; implementation of this
document is therefore not advised.
I don't see any harm to keep it as is.
Which is more or less the opinion I see expressed on the tsvwg list.
Perhaps it needs raising it on yet other lists in order to get
different answers:-)
Tom Petch
Lixia
PS: on the other hand, what would a "historical status" imply? the ideas
obsolete?
On 1/5/2011 9:44 PM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
Hello all,
There have been a discussion on tsvwg mailing list about old transport
layer protocols - exactly IRTP (RFC938), RDP (RFC908,1151) and NETBLT
(RFC998). Initially there have been proposed to define IANA
considerations for them. But after a discussion it was found out that it
would be better to move them to Historic. I am writing to request more
wider discussion on this topic.
There is quite strong consensus that IRTP should be Historic. There is a
registered draft on this topic:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yevstifeyev-tsvwg-irtp-to-historic/
But as for others it should be discussed. Moreover, maybe anyone knows
some other old transport-layer protocols that are no longer in use?
Please copy tour answer to tsvwg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
All the best,
Mykyta Yevstifeyev
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf