Pekka Savola wrote:
There's certainly no illusion that these protocols are not being used
in some part(s) of the universe.
The question is really whether the IETF is interested in maintaining
them any longer, and whether we expect significant new deployments of
these protocols.
Marking the document historic does not take it "away" from deployment
-- marking document as historic doesn't hurt at all (except
procedurally, when used as a normative reference, but then we have to
do some work in any case if the reference was outdated).
This must be some new redefinition of the meaning of a Historic RFC.
In the past, it meant "don't do it this way anymore, we no longer
recommend it, there's another way to accomplish the same goal".
So, for the PPP items listed, what's the better way to accomplish the
same goal?
The IPSec items have another way. Indeed, we had a better way at the
time of publication, but couldn't get the IESG to publish 3DES or SHA1
or any other more robust algorithm as a Proposed Standard.
--
William Allen Simpson
Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf