RE: "Deprecate"

That would be great.

Should 4020bis have a gating normative reference on 5226bis?

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
> [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
> Michelle Cotton
> Sent: 29 August 2013 15:53
> To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); t.p.; ietf
> Subject: Re: "Deprecate"
>
> We are working on 5226bis right now and have a plans to discuss the term
> in there.
>
> --Michelle Cotton
>
> Michelle Cotton
> Manager, IANA Services
> ICANN
>
>
>
> On 8/29/13 5:22 AM, "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)"
> <chris(_dot_)dearlove(_at_)baesystems(_dot_)com> wrote:
>
> > It's definitely an ISO term, I see it used for features of C++.
> >
> > There's then discussion even there of what it means. It is, I think,
> > meant to be used for "we don't think you should use this, there's
> > something better, and this is a warning that it may get removed in a
> > future version". In the case of computer languages there is an additional
> > possibility of "your compiler may emit a warning if you persist in using
> > it".
> >
> > But the only major feature (export) removed in the last C++ version went
> > straight from "part of the standard, but only one compiler ever
> > implemented it, and thus found out it was a bad realisation of an idea"
> > to removed, with no intermediate deprecated stage. And other features
> > just hang around deprecated. So it really doesn't guarantee anything in
> > that instance, neither than if deprecated will go, not if not deprecated
> > won't go.
> >
> > --
> > Christopher Dearlove
> > Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> > Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> > BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> > West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> > Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> > chris(_dot_)dearlove(_at_)baesystems(_dot_)com | http://www.baesystems.com
> >
> > BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> > Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace
> > Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> > Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
> > [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
> > t.p.
> > Sent: 29 August 2013 12:56
> > To: ietf
> > Subject: "Deprecate"
> >
> > ----------------------! WARNING ! ----------------------
> > This message originates from outside our organisation,
> > either from an external partner or from the internet.
> > Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> > Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> > for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I recently saw 'deprecate' used in an IANA Considerations and turned to
> > "IANA Considerations" [RFC5226] to see how it was defined only to find
> > no mention of it there.  I am used to the term from SMI, as quoted
> > below, but that seems not quite right, in that a deprecated IANA entry
> > never disappears, as in
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml#smi-
> number
> > s-5
> >
> > Are there other, perhaps better definitions of the term 'deprecated' in
> > use outside SMI (and yes, I know about praying nuns!)?
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>
> > To: "IPv6 Maintanence" <ipv6(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
> > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:32 PM
> > Subject: "Deprecate"
> >
> >
> > > At the mike a moment ago, I referred to an existing formal definition
> > of "deprecate". For the record, the reference is to RFC 1158, which
> > reads:
> > > 3.1.  Deprecated Objects
> > >
> > >    In order to better prepare implementors for future changes in the
> > >    MIB, a new term "deprecated" may be used when describing an object.
> > >    A deprecated object in the MIB is one which must be supported, but
> > >    one which will most likely be removed from the next version of the
> > >    MIB (e.g., MIB-III).
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> > > ipv6(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> > > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > *************************************************************
> *******
> > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
> > distribute its contents to any other person.
> > *************************************************************
> *******
> >