Re: "Deprecate"

---- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Michelle Cotton'" <michelle.cotton@icann.org>; "'Dearlove,
Christopher (UK)'" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>; "'t.p.'"
<daedulus@btconnect.com>; "'ietf'" <ietf@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:13 PM
Subject: RE: "Deprecate"

> That would be great.
>
> Should 4020bis have a gating normative reference on 5226bis?

Tricky;  it would mean we are approving 4020bis without knowing what it
means, until 5226bis is approved.

Tom Petch

>
> Adrian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of
> > Michelle Cotton
> > Sent: 29 August 2013 15:53
> > To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); t.p.; ietf
> > Subject: Re: "Deprecate"
> >
> > We are working on 5226bis right now and have a plans to discuss the
term
> > in there.
> >
> > --Michelle Cotton
> >
> > Michelle Cotton
> > Manager, IANA Services
> > ICANN
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/29/13 5:22 AM, "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)"
> > <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > >It's definitely an ISO term, I see it used for features of C++.
> > >
> > >There's then discussion even there of what it means. It is, I
think,
> > >meant to be used for "we don't think you should use this, there's
> > >something better, and this is a warning that it may get removed in
a
> > >future version". In the case of computer languages there is an
additional
> > >possibility of "your compiler may emit a warning if you persist in
using
> > >it".
> > >
> > >But the only major feature (export) removed in the last C++ version
went
> > >straight from "part of the standard, but only one compiler ever
> > >implemented it, and thus found out it was a bad realisation of an
idea"
> > >to removed, with no intermediate deprecated stage. And other
features
> > >just hang around deprecated. So it really doesn't guarantee
anything in
> > >that instance, neither than if deprecated will go, not if not
deprecated
> > >won't go.
> > >
> > >--
> > >Christopher Dearlove
> > >Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> > >Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> > >BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> > >West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> > >Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> > >chris.dearlove@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
> > >
> > >BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> > >Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace
> > >Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> > >Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
> > >
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of
> > >t.p.
> > >Sent: 29 August 2013 12:56
> > >To: ietf
> > >Subject: "Deprecate"
> > >
> > >----------------------! WARNING ! ----------------------
> > >This message originates from outside our organisation,
> > >either from an external partner or from the internet.
> > >Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> > >Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> > >for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> > >--------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >I recently saw 'deprecate' used in an IANA Considerations and
turned to
> > >"IANA Considerations" [RFC5226] to see how it was defined only to
find
> > >no mention of it there.  I am used to the term from SMI, as quoted
> > >below, but that seems not quite right, in that a deprecated IANA
entry
> > >never disappears, as in
> > >http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml#smi-
> > number
> > >s-5
> > >
> > >Are there other, perhaps better definitions of the term
'deprecated' in
> > >use outside SMI (and yes, I know about praying nuns!)?
> > >
> > >Tom Petch
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
> > >To: "IPv6 Maintanence" <ipv6@ietf.org>
> > >Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:32 PM
> > >Subject: "Deprecate"
> > >
> > >
> > >> At the mike a moment ago, I referred to an existing formal
definition
> > >of "deprecate". For the record, the reference is to RFC 1158, which
> > >reads:
> > >>
> > >> 3.1.  Deprecated Objects
> > >>
> > >>    In order to better prepare implementors for future changes in
the
> > >>    MIB, a new term "deprecated" may be used when describing an
object.
> > >>    A deprecated object in the MIB is one which must be supported,
but
> > >>    one which will most likely be removed from the next version of
the
> > >>    MIB (e.g., MIB-III).
> >
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> > >> ipv6@ietf.org
> > >> Administrative Requests:
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >*************************************************************
> > *******
> > >This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> > >recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> > >recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> > >You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
> > >distribute its contents to any other person.
> > >*************************************************************
> > *******
> > >
>
>