Re: [dhcwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8415 (6269)

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Thu, 03 September 2020 19:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E53013A0CEF for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 12:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f75az03jiPI7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 12:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38F8F3A0C9F for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 12:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D70CC389AC; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 15:19:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id PLC9usTHkhXB; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 15:19:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DD9389A6; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 15:19:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB0D21CB; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 15:40:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz@cisco.com>
cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, "tomasz.mrugalski\@gmail.com" <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>, "msiodelski\@gmail.com" <msiodelski@gmail.com>, "Andrew Yourtchenko \(ayourtch\)" <ayourtch@cisco.com>, "jiangsheng\@huawei.com" <jiangsheng@huawei.com>, "ek.ietf\@gmail.com" <ek.ietf@gmail.com>, "Eric Vyncke \(evyncke\)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, "tim\@qacafe.com" <tim@qacafe.com>, "fhamme\@united-internet.de" <fhamme@united-internet.de>, "dhcwg\@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <BN7PR11MB2547770FEDCEB3A47057FB7CCF2C0@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20200830154615.6CECEF4076B@rfc-editor.org> <BN7PR11MB2547CB85EBCF595FEE42A340CF510@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <6C4649AD-EB18-47E6-A5EA-440910977A26@fugue.com> <BN7PR11MB254709039DF02A88173AA96CCF2C0@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <AF158680-0083-463B-9C52-141B17B5613C@fugue.com> <BN7PR11MB2547770FEDCEB3A47057FB7CCF2C0@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2020 15:40:53 -0400
Message-ID: <2579.1599162053@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/jTIeCBfWcWYLgYZGltvPWthDcGc>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 03 Sep 2020 12:46:25 -0700
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8415 (6269)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2020 19:40:59 -0000

Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com> wrote:
    > That’s my guess as well.

    > Perhaps Tim W has some data as to whether it is used or not (and whether it is even tested).

    > If it isn’t used / implemented, may also be difficult to confirm interop.
    > Anyway, perhaps something to consider as part of the “full” Standard
    > work to see if we need a post-8415.

Good point. So marking this errata as basically something to deprecate would
be a good record to keep.