Re: [newtrk] Last Call comments on draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-01.txt

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Brian,

I have submitted draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-02.txt for 
publication with the five RFCs removed, a comment added regarding them, 
and the text that Harald provided for IANA considerations.

Eliot

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> AD hat on.
> 
> Since none of these were copied to the WG, here is
> a compilation of the Last Call comments, including responses
> to IANA's question.
> 
> I request the authors and WG to reach consensus on
> 
> 1. whether to remove the 5 RFCs mentioned by Orly from the list
> (note his second message at the end that only mentions two of them).
> 
> 2. how to respond to IANA
> 
> If some RFCs are removed, I would like to see a revised I-D,
> since it would be very confusing to have them removed during
> the editorial process.
> 
>    Brian
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [newtrk] Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an 
> experiment to    identify obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:35:25 -0500
> From: Spencer Dawkins <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> References: <[e-mail]>
> 
> I support this action, FWIW...
> 
> Spencer
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: FW: FW: Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an experiment 
> to    identify obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 23:26:27 +0200
> From: Orly Nicklass <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> 
> 
> - 1381, 1382:
> - 1471, 1472, 1473:
> are still in active use by some of our products.
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an experiment to 
> identify    obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC 
> [I06-051024-0011]
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:44:53 -0700
> From: [e-mail]
> Reply-To: [e-mail]
> To: [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
> 
> 
> IESG:
> 
> The IANA has reviewed the following Internet-Draft which is in Last
> Call:  draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-01.txt,  and has the following
> with regards to the publication of this document:
> 
> Upon approval of this document the IANA will review all the IANA 
> registries and update the references to be this document for the all 
> documents described in section 3.  Should all the actual assignments 
> also be marked as OBSOLETE or should the reference only be changed?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Michelle Cotton
> (on behalf of IANA)
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an experiment to 
> identify obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC 
> [I06-051024-0011]
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:27:50 +0200
> From: Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>
> To: Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>
> CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
> References: <[e-mail]> 
> <[e-mail]>
> 
> Michelle,
> 
> My recommendation would be to simply add the notation "Historic" to the
> reference.  Or if you like,  Historic, see RFCs (original, cruft).  Just
> because these documents are marked HISTORIC doesn't mean someone out
> there isn't using them.  We don't make that claim and there's no need to
> cause those people grief.
> 
> There is potentially a separate effort that should be undertaken to
> attempt to clean up some of the IANA databases.  For example, I'm pretty
> sure that HEMS implementations never got out of labs.  And SGMP is listed.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Eliot
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an experiment to 
> identify    obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC 
> [I06-051024-0011]
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 05:38:09 -0400 (EDT)
> From: [e-mail] (Scott Bradner)
> To: [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
> 
> 
> I hnk that the references should be changed and that is all that
> should happen - I do not think teh status of the assignments should
> change
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an experiment to 
> identify obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC 
> [I06-051024-0011]
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 05:44:05 -0700
> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
> References: <[e-mail]>
> 
> My immediate thought would be that IANA should not change the references in
> the registries at all - the correct interpretation of the values in the
> registries is still the defining RFC, not the one that declares them
> Historical.
> 
> I believe the port number registry, for instance, has many references to
> documents that are not standards-track RFCs already.
> 
> If you want to add annotations saying "Historical" to such references,
> that's reasonable, but then you should also add "Informational",
> "Experimental" or "Standards-track" to the other references in the
> registries - and as far as I know, there's no such marking now.
> 
> Don't make work you don't have to.....
> 
>                               Harald
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Getting rid of the cruft: an experiment to 
> identify    obsolete standards document' to Informational RFC 
> [I06-051024-0011]
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 17:12:29 -0400 (EDT)
> From: [e-mail] (Scott Bradner)
> To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
> 
>  > the registries at all - the correct interpretation of the values in 
> the=20
>  > registries is still the defining RFC, not the one that declares them=20
>  > Historical.
> 
> good point
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: FW: [newtrk] I-D 
> ACTION:draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-00.txt
> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:43:46 +0200
> From: Orly Nicklass <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> 
> - RFC1471 - RFC1473 - are used by our products
> 
> (end of Last Call comments)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
> web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
> mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html
> 
.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html