Re: [newtrk] Re: IESG comments on draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-02.txt

"Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com> Thu, 12 January 2006 14:08 UTC

Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Ex37j-0007pK-F4 for newtrk-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:08:21 -0500
Received: from mailapps.uoregon.edu (mailapps.uoregon.edu [128.223.142.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA19555 for <newtrk-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:06:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailapps.uoregon.edu (IDENT:U2FsdGVkX1/OFVeIC0qC80mv2NEJPaK6tFczjo0c56Q@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailapps.uoregon.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0CE2UaL012316; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:02:31 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mailapps.uoregon.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id k0CE2UQY012315; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:02:30 -0800
Received: from execdsl.com (mail.shinkuro.com [216.194.124.237]) by mailapps.uoregon.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0CE2Uxa012310 for <newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:02:30 -0800
Received: from [162.84.74.172] (HELO JMHLap3.stevecrocker.com) by execdsl.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.7) with ESMTP id 12899048 for newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:59:32 -0700
Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20060112085817.02d29728@mail.stevecrocker.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:02:25 -0500
To: New Track <newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com>
Subject: Re: [newtrk] Re: IESG comments on draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-02.txt
In-Reply-To: <20060112072407.GA13064@nokia.com>
References: <43A6C189.5030808@zurich.ibm.com> <43A7FD75.407@zurich.ibm.com> <8635B5E6C3C54CD0077C4054@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <43C371D6.7070001@cisco.com> <3A4840D0F00A6A76B5D64133@svartdal.hjemme.alvestrand.no> <43C398F7.2030103@cisco.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601101345490.1419@netcore.fi> <43C3A08C.3080204@cisco.com> <20060112010657.GL10186@nokia.com> <43C5ADA3.2040508@isi.edu> <20060112072407.GA13064@nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88/1239/Thu Jan 12 03:36:22 2006 on mailapps
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Sender: owner-newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu
Precedence: bulk

Actually, there are multiple ways in which getting things properly marked 
historic is helpful.

The simplest case is when I have to explain to Marketing / Product 
Management which features we need.  Sure, they look at the boxes out 
there.  They then try to look at all the vaguely relevant RFCs, and often 
ask for almost everything.  Getting the really obsolete ones marked as 
historic will help me explain to them why those are not needed.

A related case is when I try to understand a new and complex aspect.  I can 
usually use the obsoletes / updates information to help figure out what I 
need to read.  But getting some of the clutter marked as historic will 
definitely help.  (And we do presume that our documents are actually for 
folks who are not active in this community.)

In fact, arguing that the "free market" will make this decision means that 
there is actually a barrier to entry for new players in that they have to 
figure out what the "free market" as "decided".  I don't actually think 
that is good for the internet as a whole.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern

At 02:24 AM 1/12/2006, David Kessens wrote:

>Joe,
>
>On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 05:15:15PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote:
> >
> > I disagree; IMO, the work this represents helps move the chaff out of
> > the way so that the wheat - old wheat and new wheat - is easier to find.
> > Organizing the wheat so it's useful is just as productive - sometimes
> > moreso - as generating new wheat.
>
>The free market (and open source community as well) is way quicker and
>more efficient in determining whether something is historic/obsolete
>than the IETF. People vote with their pocket book and simply abandon
>the protocol when it no longer makes sense. I see very little value
>for us to spend a large amount of time to make a standard officially
>historic years *after* it is already widespread knowledge that a
>(proposed) standard is indeed historic/obsolete.
>
>David Kessens
>---
>.
>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