On 1/6/2011 12:40 PM, Bob Braden wrote:
Historic might imply that they were once in service, but have later been replaced/deprecated.
We assign labels to indicate the status of the specification, not the status of a service that might use it.
We say 'experimental' to mean that we thinks it's ok to play around with the spec and maybe that we are hoping to get further information about it. But it also means that we very much caution about use. It's our "caveat emptor" label.
We say 'historic' when we frankly think the spec should now not be used, for whatever reason and no matter its prior status.
These both are affirmative labels. I too do not think we should use them for "housekeeping" and the mere fact that a specification is not used does not mean that it shouldn't be used.
To the extent that having a spec around -- especially one on standards track -- might seem to conflict with another, preferred spec, then it's worth considering making the one that is out of favor become historic. The same holds for specifications that are now deemed problematic.
But none of this is about propriety or neatness or a community OCD neurosis. It needs to be about pragmatic guidance to the community.
d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf