Hello Eliot, Thank you for reading the document. Pleas efind some comments in-line. 2011/3/2, Eliot Lear <lear@xxxxxxxxx>: > Thank you for the opportunity to review this draft. I do so merely as > an individual. It might be a good idea to provide some additional > clarity on when to market something Historic, but your document requires > a bit of clarity on its own as to what your motivating logic is. Why, > for instance, do you believe it is important to split "deprecated" and > "obsoleted"? > In my opinion, the term 'obsoleted' means that it is out-of-use while 'deprected' means that it not recommended to be used and implemented because of some reason. > > Also, Scott had to choose some language to describe > Historic. He probably did not mean for us to get hung up on the word > "superceded", a problem from which this draft seems to suffer. > RFC 2026 says that Historic is for RFCs that has been superseded by a more recent specification or is for any other reason considered to be obsolete. However some recent observations have shown that everyone has their own thoughts on what the word 'obsolete' means. Some think that it is the synonym yo the word 'superseded' while other consider it to be 'deprectaed' as well. I propose to provide the clarity on this terms. > > I bring to your attention RFC-4450, in which we made a bulk status > change of a bunch of PS to Historic precisely because we couldn't find > anyone using those protocols. However, such observations are > imprecise. For one, it is hard to observe what is going on on the > Internet, and those who do don't usually share their data (there is > some, but it is often regionally based, like the GINORMOUS store at > ETHZ). Another issue is that a protocol that is not detectable on the > Internet might be in use on private networks. > When we say 'out-of-use' we consider the usage of something in the overall Internet. It is mostly not very difficault to find this out via those people who take part in the IETF. You've also given me the idea to mention the criterion for 'obsoleted' documents such as it is the retired or revised Internet standard, per RFC 2026. I'll make this change in my working copy of the draft. All the best, Mykyta Yevstifeyev > > Eliot > > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf