Re: [Iasa20] Odd deprecations in draft-ietf-iasa2-consolidated-upd-05

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 1:15 PM Brian E Carpenter <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> 3929 has no explicit time limit, which these days is considered bad
> practice for procedural experiments. So yes, it isn't this WG's
> job to decide. But the IETF can of course decide. If it's clear
> that this is subject to Last Call comments, is there really a problem?
>
> I don't see how the lack of experimental deadline makes it this WG's job
to decide--can you clarify your thinking?  In this document's case, it is
hard to call the experiment done when it has never been exercised.  We can
say that the threat of it has been useful, but that the actual methods are
"not proven" (in the Scots legal sense).

My take on why they were included was more that they included the phrase
"IETF Executive Director"; the doc says that specific methods require
telling the IETF Executive Director something (e.g. that you volunteer to
serve).  The working group concluded that this didn't mean the new
Executive Director, but meant the Secretariat role that used that term
before.  I personally would fix that with an erratum, rather than
deprecation or obsolescence.

I may, of course, have a slight bias here.

Ted