Doug,
2011/1/28 Doug Ewell <doug(_at_)ewellic(_dot_)org>
Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2 at gmail dot com> wrote:
I'm writing to request the review of
draft-yevstifeyev-genarea-historic-01, that could be found here:
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-yevstifeyev-genarea-historic-01.txt
The document says:
2.1. Criteria for Historic RFCs
If the RFC is replaced by another one, it SHALL be considered to be
superseded.
The RFC SHALL be considered to be obsolete if it meets the following
criteria:
a. It has been publicly available for at least 7 years;
b. During this period of time the technology, described in this RFC
has not been seen used in the Internet; or
c. The technology defined in this RFC is not possible or is not
advised to be used in the Internet because of its security issues,
impact on its performance or any other reason.
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 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?
Mykyta Yevstifeyev
The phrase "or any other reason" seems unnecessarily open-ended, and may
invite abuse.
--
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
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf