ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Request for Review - draft-yevstifeyev-genarea-historic-01

2011-01-30 12:51:26
Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:

I'd like to see some kind of guideline that the RFC should not be considered 
obsolete solely because of security or performance concerns in some 
particular, specific context.  For example, the fact that vanilla FTP is not 
sufficiently secure for use in some applications where high security is 
paramount is not a rationale for deprecating FTP in all applications.

In the case I mentioned as c the key words are 'is not possible or is not 
advised to be used in the Internet' but not what you mentioned.

The document says “is not advised to be used in the Internet because of its 
security issues, impact on its performance or any other reason.”  (Do you agree 
that the document says that?)  My point is that, because security or 
performance issues in one context do not necessarily imply security or 
performance issues in all contexts, they should not by themselves (or together 
with the 7-year criterion) be sufficient to trigger deprecation.

The phrase 'or any other reason' is put because there is no possibility to 
put the exhaustive list of such purposes.   Anyway, what would you like to 
propose here?

I don’t have exact replacement wording.  “Any other reason” could permit me to 
propose deprecation or “historicization” of a protocol because I don’t like the 
guy who created it, or because my company is promoting a rival protocol.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s ­
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf