At 01:04 PM 6/2/2011, John C Klensin 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.
Agreed. It's easier to do a Last Call. If anyone objects, go
through I-D path to explain why the RFC should be reclassified.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf