On 20/11/2013 17:25, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 11/20/2013 9:13 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
it should be done with a document that explains the
deployment situation and explains why the reclassification is
appropriate despite that.
...
John has a reasonable point about writing up an explanation, and we
have had volunteers to do so.
The IETF has some history moving documents to Historic status. I have
not noticed that it has a track record of requiring documents to
explain the actions for these earlier examples.
If indeed we've been doing it, what are these precedents?
Yes, we do. For example RFC 6196. I only wanted to update IANA registry.
I got push back without an RFC.
If we haven't, why start now?
What is the compelling community requirement that demands this
significant bit of extra work be imposed as a barrier to change in
status?
I think explaining decisions which might not be obvious to a person who
was not around when the decision was made is a good thing. But yes, this
is extra work.
Extra work needs to have compelling extra benefit.