[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [smime] [Cfrg] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-turner-md2-to-historic-00.txt]

2010-06-10 08:37:37
Simon Josefsson <simon(_at_)josefsson(_dot_)org> writes:

1) MD2 is not on the standards track, it is Informational.  I agree with
  wishes to move "poor" documents from the Standards Track to Historic,
  but I'm not sure I see such a big difference between having a "poor"
  document as Informational or Historic.  Especially for a crypto
  algorithm, which the IETF typically does not put on the standards
  track at all.  Is there some precedent for moving Informational to

It helps to have something like this formally retired so you have a document
to point to when someone wants to use (or continue to use) MD2.  Trying to
explain to them the difference between "Informational" and "Standards Track"
when their requirement is "must be specified in an RFC" isn't generally

(We really need an RFC equivalent of the UK's Great Repeal Bill at some

smime mailing list