[IPsec] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev1-algo-to-historic-08: (with DISCUSS)

[Warren Kumari via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev1-algo-to-historic-08: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev1-algo-to-historic/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Be ye not afraid -- see
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ on
handling ballots, especially DISCUSS ballots...

Can the IETF actually deprecate / make a protocol historic? (as stated in
"Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1) has been deprecated" and "IKEv1 has
been moved to Historic status.")

I agree that **making the documents that describe these** be historic is the
right thing to do, and also that the IETF can strongly recommend that people
don't use/deploy/whatever IKEv1, but I don't really know if we (or anyone) have
the power to deprecate a protocol. We are not the protocol police, and we
cannot instruct people to e.g deploy protocol foo, so I don't know if we can
deprecate a protocol either -- but I suspect that this might be because I don't
actually know what "IKEv1 has been deprecated" actually *means*.

Again, I'm not trying to block what this document is attempting to *do*, but
rather make it clear what it is actually doing.