[[ For those of you not on the original mailing lists this was sent to. ]]
X-BrightmailFiltered: true
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:49:54 +0100
From: Eliot Lear <lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: drums(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu, lemonade(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org,
discuss(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: standards spring cleaning
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.1.0
X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352
Cc:
X-BeenThere: discuss(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols
<discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>,
<mailto:discuss-request(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>,
<mailto:discuss-request(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: discuss-bounces(_at_)apps(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org
Good day,
I am currently involved in an experimental process to see what it
would take to hold to the notion that Proposed and Draft Standards
shouldn't stay in that state forever. There are a number of mail
related standards that fall into this category, and I wonder if
people can tell me whether the list of standards below (or any
others on the broader list) should stay or go. The original list
was generated programmatically by looking for proposed standards
below RFC 2000 that are not obsoleted (we'll do draft later).
Here they are:
RFC1421 Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part
I: Message Encryption and Authentication Procedures
RFC1422 Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part
II: Certificate-Based Key Management
RFC1423 Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part
III: Algorithms, Modes, and Identifiers
RFC1424 Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part
IV: Key Certification and Related Services
RFC1494 Equivalences between 1988 X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies
RFC1496 Rules for downgrading messages from X.400/88 to
X.400/84 when MIME content-types are present in the messages
RFC1502 X.400 Use of Extended Character Sets
RFC1648 Postmaster Convention for X.400 Operations
RFC1740 MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh Files - MacMIME
RFC1767 MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects
RFC1848 MIME Object Security Services
RFC1985 SMTP Service Extension for Remote Message Queue Starting
(ETRN)
If you believe any of the above standards should not be reclassified
as historic, could you please send a note to
old-standards(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no with the RFC number and a brief reason
as to why not and whether the document should be advanced. A good
reason is that the standard is still generally useful. A bad reason
is that a piece of old code implements it somewhere on the 'net.
That having been said we have a pretty low threshold for removing
something from the above list.
Thanks for your time,
Eliot
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium