Re: Is it necessary to go through Standards Track to Get to Historic?

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Bruce Lilly wrote:
...
> Aside from the label -- and that's not a clear benefit because Historic is
> ambiguous -- I don't see much difference between Historic and an
> Informational RFC with a suitable IESG note (a "warning label" if you will).
> 

There's a difference. For example, imagine a media type called

   splat/illogical

that's been used for some years but is generally considered to be
illogically named, and a new media type has been defined to do the
same thing:

   splot/logical

It would then be reasonable to document splat/illogical as Historic
to explain its IANA registration, and to document splot/logical as
Informational.

But you're certainly correct that a health warning in the text of
the RFC is more important than a status marker in the index.

    Brian


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf