Re: [dtn] Marking RFC5050 as Obsolete?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Tue, 01 October 2019 20:55 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F04F1200C1 for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 13:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 oaOTihbDqG9N for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 13:55:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5796A12001E for <dtn@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 13:55:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.34.217] (h-164-71.A137.corp.bahnhof.se [37.123.164.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46jWkJ4WXdzySH; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 22:55:20 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <9b7cd0f263074b8ca1c35235f0eedacf@jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 22:55:57 +0200
Cc: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, "irtf-chair@irtf.org" <irtf-chair@irtf.org>, "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 591656155.260463-c026f08dc9b795919391123273c309b5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3107EEFB-707F-4429-B9C9-0A0C50C5C8C9@tzi.org>
References: <ecc5ee275929440b8b70d570451219a77dc5a176.camel@tropicalstormsoftware.com> <1376435003.14731004.1569226573419@mail.yahoo.com> <7DC9F8DB-00E1-47C6-8F05-93771AEE4B0C@tzi.org> <75A02579-9C5A-4692-86FA-B5B73AF84A2A@csperkins.org> <780D35E5-B4CA-4C77-A217-19034BB60EE8@gmail.com> <66CC5320-E483-4FC9-A610-1D79A899A704@tzi.org> <10753318-5C0A-4401-A028-EAB657CF9002@csperkins.org> <a2f26181a52848b59032e036fee0ea11@boeing.com> <396DBA23-B220-412B-8E89-B0E73993F382@tzi.org> <da135487a9f74feb85de07dd38db6078@boeing.com> <9b7cd0f263074b8ca1c35235f0eedacf@jpl.nasa.gov>
To: "Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B)" <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/_gWdaxdVDwCo6HlJu_h1JZu4vFY>
Subject: Re: [dtn] Marking RFC5050 as Obsolete?
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <dtn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtn/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 20:55:25 -0000

On Oct 1, 2019, at 16:19, Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B) <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> 
> In which case it is perhaps just unnecessary to mark RFC 5050 as obsolete?

There are always other ways to obtain or infer some information, but the “obsoletes” relationship was specifically created to express this.  We should use it.  Not using it sends a confused signal.

Grüße, Carsten