On 01/06/2011 15:40 EST, Bob Braden wrote: > > Historic might imply that they were once in service, but have later been > replaced/deprecated. In fact, these protocols were always, and are > still, *experimental*. It would seem logical to assign them the > Experimental category and be done with it. > > Bob Braden Yup. > > > On 1/5/2011 9:44 PM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> There have been a discussion on tsvwg mailing list about old transport >> layer protocols - exactly IRTP (RFC938), RDP (RFC908,1151) and NETBLT >> (RFC998). Initially there have been proposed to define IANA >> considerations for them. But after a discussion it was found out that it >> would be better to move them to Historic. I am writing to request more >> wider discussion on this topic. >> >> There is quite strong consensus that IRTP should be Historic. There is a >> registered draft on this topic: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yevstifeyev-tsvwg-irtp-to-historic/ >> >> >> But as for others it should be discussed. Moreover, maybe anyone knows >> some other old transport-layer protocols that are no longer in use? >> >> Please copy tour answer to tsvwg@xxxxxxxx >> >> All the best, >> Mykyta Yevstifeyev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf mailing list >> Ietf@xxxxxxxx >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf