Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-undeployed-03.txt> (Moving Outdated TCP Extensions and TCP-related Documents to Historic and Informational Status) to Informational RFC

[[e-mail]]

On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 07:31:13 -0800, The IESG said:
>
> The IESG has received a request from the TCP Maintenance and Minor
> Extensions WG (tcpm) to consider the following document:
> - 'Moving Outdated TCP Extensions and TCP-related Documents to Historic
>    and Informational Status'
>   <draft-ietf-tcpm-undeployed-03.txt> as Informational RFC
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> [e-mail] mailing lists by 2016-01-18. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The draft says in section 2.1:

   o  [RFC1078] U, "TCP Port Service Multiplexer (TCPMUX)" should be
      deprecated, because:
....
      *  There are no known client-side deployments.

SGI's Data Migration Facility does in fact use tcpmux on port 1 for client
systems to contact the DMF server for out-of-band administrative functions.
However, this usage is (as far as I know, after been the admin of a DMF system
for 5 years) strictly confined to intercommunication between the clients and
server of a DMF cluster, and I know of no other vendors or packages that
try to talk to DMF over tcpmux (everything uses the SGI-provided DMF client
tools to do the heavy lifting, and then operates on the output of the tool).

Whether that should be sufficient to deter moving RFC1078 to deprecated is a
question for somebody else to answer.