IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: Moving RFC911 to Historic

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 21 January 2022 17:30 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81FCA3A0FC4; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 09:30:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 d0GGad3Ov2or; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 09:30:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60B573A0FC3; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 09:30:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p5089a5d9.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.165.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4JgRGz2q0zzDCbr; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 18:30:35 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <C1F96261-C284-4785-AAED-7A50336C7E20@vpnc.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 18:30:34 +0100
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 664479034.838967-7853766c6801cd11de16d2438f3d21e7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BB2E24C7-E8EE-490B-AC82-36F345AD953A@tzi.org>
References: <164271803816.5455.7128644306829727169@ietfa.amsl.com> <69AE07DD-FCBD-471A-886A-57283504E42C@eggert.org> <CAMMESsxqtU6_eESoO353_bAa_k3Z69erA6744_ixDPYRaBCgmA@mail.gmail.com> <74B3331408B367B0FBB9A50E@PSB> <383635E3-E682-496A-AF10-8C9683445C94@akamai.com> <76ABA366533E237CC4E219FD@PSB> <C1F96261-C284-4785-AAED-7A50336C7E20@vpnc.org>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/QqPt9iacqOK_PNjtgFgq3dFnmZs>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: Moving RFC911 to Historic
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 17:30:45 -0000

On 2022-01-21, at 17:38, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> 
> This seems like a lot of effort for no defined (or discernible) value to the RFC-reading community.

I’d like to hear the backstory from the original submitter…
Did RFC 911 pop up in an RFP and was hard to get rid of as a requirement?
Just speculating…

Grüße, Carsten

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