Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: Moving RFC 4491 to Historic

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





8 янв. 2022 г., в 00:20, Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> написал(а):

It looks like draft-deremin-rfc4491-bis is in the works to replace RFC 4491.  Why is this action needed before the bis is approved to replace it?
Moreover, consider https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/designating-rfcs-historic-2014-07-20/

"However, the only instructions in 2026 for its use are in section 6, and those are to move full "Internet Standard" status documents to "Historic" status, thereby "retiring" the technology in the standard. This differs from the "Obsoletes:" header that is put on documents as per RFC 2223. The "Obsoletes:" header indicates a replacement version of the same technology, rather than a retirement of the technology itself. Using "Obsoletes:" is simply a matter of indicating this in the header of the RFC. Moving a document to "Historic" status requires a specific IETF-­wide Last Call and a formal action of the IESG.»

Header  «Updated» or «Obsoleted» is definitely more appropriate in this case.

Proposition for assigning of «Historic» header must be elaborated to fit the scope IESG statement of «retiring _the_technology_ itself».

Current proposition contains nothing except reference to the deprecation of usage of given algorithms in the
«systems presented for certification» in the given certification system. 

There are a number of algorithms in IETF documents database with the same current status of being deprecated for usage in certified systems, but none of them is being attempted to assign a «Historic» header in IETF (cf. MD5, SHA-1, etc.).

I think that more  consistent approach to usage of this header should be developed, and «shortcut» procedure #1 from the quoted statement of assigning it should be considered the first candidate for applying it <grin>. ;)


dol@






Russ


On Jan 7, 2022, at 2:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Naive question:

RFC 4491 (currently a PS) formally updates RFC 3279 (also a PS). How will a reader of RFC 3279 in future know that they need to look at RFCxxxx ("a new document being
progressed in the Independent Submission Stream")? Will RFC 4491 receive an "Obsoleted by" tag?

Regards
 Brian Carpenter

On 08-Jan-22 06:08, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make the
following status changes:
- RFC4491 from Proposed Standard to Historic
   (Using the GOST R 34.10-94, GOST R 34.10-2001, and GOST R 34.11-94
   Algorithms with the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate
   and CRL Profile)
The supporting document for this request can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-old-gost-pkix-to-historic/
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2022-02-04. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
The affected document can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc4491/
IESG discussion of this request can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-old-gost-pkix-to-historic/ballot/
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux