On Jun 2, 2011 4:05 PM, "John C Klensin" <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
While the IESG is considering this, I would encourage you to
also consider the model used to make a specification that is
simply and obviously obsolete (and in A/S terms "not
recommended") Historic without having to have an I-D written and
processed into RFC via the same process used to create Standards
Track documents. In the cases in which we want to move a
specification to Historic because it is a bad idea, having an
RFC to explain why it was a bad idea seems appropriate. But for
the "no one cares about it any more" cases, it seems like a
lighter-weight procedure, such as a Last Call on the question
"does anyone believe that our impression that no one cares is
incorrect?" might be in order (and much closer to the procedure
that was used when (and before) 2026 was adopted.
Agree, but producing such a "no one cares anymore" RFC and getting it
through the process should be lightweight enough already. It should slide
right through. I hope we don't need yet another special process because our
normal process is too heavy.
Scott
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf