IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Thoughts on draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 03 January 2022 00:59 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70EAD3A160D; Sun, 2 Jan 2022 16:59:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9xQCdRRvzqBV; Sun, 2 Jan 2022 16:59:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06FCF3A160B; Sun, 2 Jan 2022 16:59:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id i8so20402818pgt.13; Sun, 02 Jan 2022 16:59:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to :date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=xJuliB7NXMpVVH5vbAobojcoXqd6fCjL2az3ozl7dPY=; b=Ywbd5F5xCFfDfVYLKvzn993DJ5c3BtQJPu7Q4+yuvtcmo6avuAQzZth3UwMN17Xgmw MIP4+SJRFxBdPGLnkHy4YhPQjOf12Y/aFP1kO+AFWefULr64q3PAgB/CopTYWW9xnlRi 1uFp2I1vxi2ExFTeHZM4SZhIZUNawyOqdtVnM5k9mvUdWBfkDPW4rhieL/FMFDkrRMeE fXR1XjxqM07esCCXZ/yM3vkNwzuH9ytYJuvPlZtIT/QbWo0o7EzycAu/SsstFh5gFGRE 2kSQvDhSYnsJCQMCRAFc9psUxu/RNdnFxupFs3SPkyZ9f2oSsGfnfHtmQT2o1RNAUGFP Z5rQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=xJuliB7NXMpVVH5vbAobojcoXqd6fCjL2az3ozl7dPY=; b=P2vSi3vfNgzcQls+0kkOTr8Gi7rHQHwgbeHLIPAIFVJXGc4UfrslGVqZS/0uVUQUH6 r2fHWvzU+F9r7fjQwnTqUgcp65pmDaeJftnN6vahZV7OR9yXGjAbF2tlZ6h4YDBPYvT0 bUXNL+uVfFA0p0YAnm+KfsNfjkLY9vHPVwa7GcRcxDNkUZm/W1/Px4harMlb+YgXRDNh 77UsWgAE4zMf4p2tMwNWeuqL+/rXrUQOW8mYIEvUdN6kTBbLRZADXNAg9HRoOUo69t0C bFoGhFW3FBkhY3UbWYhyS+r85sv7bLOLw9Zy5ehzKyw+kJYAZGgeii+0TZVblGR+xcGw gFyg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Xh8NyCekErw4NYpXiYT+p4O9mT2tDguNvZ7ofeCdYQIdov+zm sYTf8UW6cMlO+2e4GMcbvno=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwPLIDCmLw9bsL9YazNCrr+Cgd/A/KhqmTHQj++YPxwBK8PeCHj/qIHiioIVbMWCjx9zCzGlw==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:9556:0:b0:4ba:9428:4471 with SMTP id w22-20020aa79556000000b004ba94284471mr44088891pfq.72.1641171560028; Sun, 02 Jan 2022 16:59:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (ip68-111-231-227.sd.sd.cox.net. [68.111.231.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l11sm2304197pfu.115.2022.01.02.16.59.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 02 Jan 2022 16:59:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Fred Baker <FredBaker.IETF@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert
In-Reply-To: <002d01d8001c$3e3a1db0$baae5910$@olddog.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2022 16:59:17 -0800
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>, draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert@ietf.org
Message-Id: <AFE27D1A-8615-4AE8-8F51-8857B604BEFC@gmail.com>
References: <002d01d8001c$3e3a1db0$baae5910$@olddog.co.uk>
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (19C56)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/3NVCTAq8r2LLpUMzqwzxFSrsgFU>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 00:59:28 -0000


Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...

> On Jan 2, 2022, at 1:04 PM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> Ah, so you argue precedent to create a de facto formal status for the word?

I would argue that IETF use of the word derives primarily from SNMP, wherein it is in fact defined. An SNMP object which is deprecated is mandatory to implement (but one doesn’t have to request it) in the version in question, but may be removed entirely in a subsequent version.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status