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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 12 February 2019 21:15 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873E712DF71 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:15:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 qMki80aCsoWh for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:15:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com (mail-pl1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]) (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 9DE26130DC4 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:15:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id p8so69423plo.2 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:15:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=x1qNIAwfkk+Ox+S9yCoLJVbAXftDlDM6d4dtzyMIacI=; b=usVd1/hGosX5GFrLkdyr6H2LbPbhHeN0iYMFWbC04EObwuz0VfxKn8uUr8j6lKXDZe AvV5yi6XmTsya6hleHy6FjbKTPan/Iyf6bnGeIxheyrouMpbFn2bML/l2LRWyH7iBXDF WSWgB3TD1DH+teWfMfmc8usQdehYITqoQqC0X88ogZIP1u0PLVlG1YAspnTcU8TlfSUG mTY1UXHeSvYDkYVTCDGZGirqA1LRGLykdRr5HxfOa4l0k45Betg9XtJsoOLu9uJO5omQ K3zi/WqUtYRqs5vO0oJkusXf8oXP0eu5W0oebb+p2qYlDD/foTdBnHxSnnaBnYMEQIc5 k1kg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=x1qNIAwfkk+Ox+S9yCoLJVbAXftDlDM6d4dtzyMIacI=; b=dCFaclxyIJiNQgXi92YYD19bkenaSkheJE3sln7ebltOO+GDdRITj1HA7yXzhPrXOQ Z6wxhVIz4rzJJzg2SxoqywcmJ4VL6GkZIKfoOBq+D+ofWaYWnUEHRsnY0usGfC3cznIz weUDqEr/hKLE/4F3Y+Gm7vACAQa5wqM7H5au6CKrIUaPbS6KLiCC1fqvJ58n9Y/6hDR5 szRg5MQCq0hBCSI5i/ZV7buI7pUjWkSLmjbS9uGYU9/Xf2j3B3JWsbUwJzQABTAq+N5r 3eEBUEspq6jrd/o/oz4jXeIQaJ9tIWieUENEPdFq+2BQpiXSPb7yr12cgipHQVQAfEy2 wYHA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYrRQDw7dXyAPxkrEJZkly0+Z+GO2W5Fw+HgCM4p751sH5SeuTO lNfjAzNF/FC1orOiErq+GwqaiqI5
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Iaw3OuEbj+vXr5ZAtMYF/eOVjG0ggxL5IgeBXVNvh43YYAlOQdfUuI1n1c76eWq5FsIEtF/2Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b681:: with SMTP id c1mr6063762pls.103.1550006104524; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:15:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.88.54] ([103.29.31.113]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a187sm14564998pfb.61.2019.02.12.13.15.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:15:03 -0800 (PST)
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, IASA 2 WG <iasa20@ietf.org>
References: <1b58312a-ab8e-ccba-2f9b-884091e1c603@nostrum.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <27724fb0-25ee-0226-b2ee-2b861a34cbf2@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:14:59 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1b58312a-ab8e-ccba-2f9b-884091e1c603@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/c-6a2B5ssTrNJbWJasvvNRkNbj0>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Odd deprecations in draft-ietf-iasa2-consolidated-upd-05
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions relating to reorganising the IETF administrative structures in the so called “IASA 2.0” project. <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 21:15:07 -0000

Hi Robert,
On 2019-02-13 09:23, Robert Sparks wrote:
> I realize this is a bit late (since the document has been pubreq'ed), 
> but I wanted to call this out before IETF Last Call. A re-review of some 
> of the documents going through the IAB stream caused me to read this one 
> more closely this week. Apologies for not being active on the list when 
> this was discussed.
> 
> I was surprised that this document was obsoleting things like RFC3929 ( 
> Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in 
> the IETF ) and RFC 4633 ( Experiment in Long-Term Suspensions From 
> Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Mailing Lists ).
> 
> It seems outside the remit of this working group to deprecate/obsolete 
> these (or perhaps any) RFCs (whether they should be or not).

Clearly, directly relevant RFCs may need to be obsoleted, but I agree
that these two in particular are essentially "collateral damage".
3716, on the other hand, is just an old Informational on how we used
to administer the IETF, so it needs to go.

4633 is explicitly time limited, so obsoleting it seems like routine
book keeping that the IESG could do at any time. All the same, it needs
to be called out during Last Call.

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 also note that the body had five RFCs that it asks to deprecate and 
> move to historic, but only three of those listed as obsoleted.

You are quite right about those other two. They should be in a separate
list which is essentially FYI. They don't need any status change.

3979 is not out of date. Its bullet point correctly says:

o  RFC 3979 [RFC3979], that is updated by [RFC8179], which corrects
   mentions of the IETF Executive Director to the IETF Secretariat

so it should not be deprecated.

4879 is already obsoleted by 8179. So its bullet point should say:

o  RFC 4879 [RFC4879], that is obsoleted by [RFC8179], which corrects
   mentions of the IETF Executive Director to the IETF Secretariat.

Regards
   Brian
> 
> RjS
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> iasa20@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20
>