IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments

"John G. Scudder" <jgs@bgp.nu> Sun, 22 April 2012 13:54 UTC

Return-Path: <jgs@bgp.nu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ADFB21F85A4; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.043
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.043 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_IS_SMALL6=0.556, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id monwCuFCLvih; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bgp.nu (bgp.nu [147.28.0.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45A921F859F; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.42.13] (75-151-14-9-Michigan.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [75.151.14.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bgp.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5B8566D357; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:54:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@bgp.nu>
In-Reply-To: <DF8FBB49-E4FC-492F-BF2C-81629F3F1C46@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 07:54:28 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6D8983DD-54EB-446C-9512-7145C52BF236@bgp.nu>
References: <0f6601cd1e6b$5ff2e420$1fd8ac60$@olddog.co.uk> <248A261F-D83D-4F97-8F5D-A9A0BCD2EC0D@sobco.com> <f8e77298-bbd5-4ad8-80df-a3c367f67d95.maildroid@localhost> <E0BDBD64-D3D4-4248-9EB2-BDD1F1CE39BF@virtualized.org> <DF8FBB49-E4FC-492F-BF2C-81629F3F1C46@cisco.com>
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:34:39 -0700
Cc: wgchairs@ietf.org, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:54:30 -0000

On Apr 22, 2012, at 7:44 AM, Fred Baker wrote:

> Saying that "nobody" is using a given code point or RFC of any category is very difficult.

True enough, although since you didn't give context I'm not sure who you're making that point to, or why. The proposal Adrian originally sent talks about optionally deprecating code points, which while generally related to your comment, isn't the same.

--John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email