Dave,
The Historic status has always been the subject of some ambiguity and
controversy, going back to the Founding Father. You have an opinion,
some of us may have different opinions. The appropriateness of moving
documents to Historic will probably never be fully settled. Meantime, we
should note that there is something special about Historic, that is not
true of any of the other status values: Historic is a demotion and it is
final. So there is no consistency issue with asking for an explanatory
RFC for Historic but not for full standard.
Here is a test: presumably somewhere somebody has a standard for
acoustic couplers. This is obsolete technology, right? Do you expect
that the owner of the standard will mark the standard "Obsolete"? I
would not expect it.
Bob Braden
it is final.On 11/20/2013 9:50 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 11/20/2013 9:44 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
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.
Why isn't the IETF mailing list archive discussion about the status
change sufficient as an archival record?
To be consistent, are we also going to need to publish an RFC that
explains why an RFC should be promoted to full standard? It's good to
explain that decision too, isn't it?
d/