[dtn] on obsoleting RFC5050

"Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> Thu, 17 October 2019 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
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 AF315120864 for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 03:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=viagenie-ca.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 siqVIIjGj664 for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 03:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x835.google.com (mail-qt1-x835.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::835]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E676F120860 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 03:18:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x835.google.com with SMTP id n7so2751670qtb.6 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 03:18:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=viagenie-ca.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+rET/L1QFJuetbYbcJzTrFVHlbbKwdUanMue+ZJW0UM=; b=dlG5b4ps7C9vrO2jzc8HBkl5n6Itj3D8587vlgmpo1Ol+bjg86BvhxW0mdMG1mzSmu jlTVlpVNEKhv2VL6IN5xr3qsgX+jfNsY1SKxUfdaj02HzynBt21FsqYWGoD8zWnycHkB R4tx3dgNfjePcKK2CSpSDjiA+pxz8ZZwcKTeNUWbGvRqhgKUyH2hF/dnnlofCqjLppji Zz4sRGkYhsXbNNQ+c5XkdHuKPjenTk4UB5UugvWis0aMTFF6Wt68ME3L+30wiQD1bd/s sX9INsql7QfHVGytqo5j445R/ISo2dqn6cbtpqBTqy3oVD5nubzUawUPx+BOkDOzAHBh CPVw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+rET/L1QFJuetbYbcJzTrFVHlbbKwdUanMue+ZJW0UM=; b=mIOZ0JHFmFKeUrsdzGDNcyQQ98ZIJXO6+2u8B+AJ951B7WPLQplBj3wOC/rE9PGIjv UstMDVoydpcZJzsn8Ost7gFiZh2XU4zDzKlVzsMtwyGJqs04n84bQxaosarxsRd1CTJT f84FrMsFM9weMMQoCZYKnmBbxqwOY6444D5LzboZrXgV88IPIlcJpwhpGAdHGvVwNz8H ZXbuOpjk72C77WTMGrLjO6Kb/hWO1xZ6RrGVFGcA3TIn8Uz61cdCc8/hM33fN+JeL/EV rrhxzd+f43MNCKVfrObagGxtHcHXWucFb70aDt+dvGIiW2/gp2dLQDpBASda68ORq6Xz rM0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWid7elzVhuM834E8E5FGYSFNn98C9/ybKoA30KGxoeQ20h91yj 2928dWqj2eiwHbm6fXph5RWSuhc4PIc71g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzWPNuSYHWU3LjOV14JKqBppR7knOJ2xmY03wvOdmkOhDhyXqbZg9ckJltfZqN/yp7Ab6g3NA==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:34cb:: with SMTP id x11mr2921907qtb.183.1571307516639; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 03:18:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [206.123.31.194] ([75.98.19.134]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 62sm796167qki.130.2019.10.17.03.18.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 03:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
To: "DTN WG" <dtn@ietf.org>
Cc: dtn-chairs@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 06:18:31 -0400
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13r5655)
Message-ID: <EC1EF7CB-3637-4DF4-A2CA-47902B4E3519@viagenie.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_4DB2BC8D-63EA-4CFC-8805-4DC8A8E09EAB_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/umgxQhpUvHXcO2zyDBlFHR7hnMM>
Subject: [dtn] on obsoleting RFC5050
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: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 10:18:41 -0000

Hello,
based on the various inputs and good discussion on the mailing list 
regarding obsoleting RFC5050, the chairs have come to this conclusion. 
Please state your support or not so we can move forward.

Regards, Marc&Rick, co-chairs.

* RFC5050 is an experimental RFC, done in IRTF, while 
draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis will be a Standard track RFC, done in IETF. 
Different streams, different processes.
* we believe there is a strong consensus to _not_ continue working on 
RFC5050 and not try to be backward compatible. RFC5050 implementations 
and deployments can continue as they see fit.
* IANA registries have their own life, whatever the stream or type of 
RFC they were created from. They can always be updated by a new RFC.
* Given that, we suggest the following steps:
     * 1) draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis would not obsolete RFC5050. Instead we 
would notify IRTF that draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis is an update of RFC5050. 
IRTF will decide what they want to do, if anything, with RFC5050.
     * 2) in the new version of the charter that we are currently 
working on, we will state clearly that there is no intent to work on or 
make compatible work with RFC5050 and related RFCs
     * 3) DTN working group document authors will review the IANA 
registries as they are today and request whatever modifications needed, 
which may include changing the policies, the content, the rules, …