Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-reschke-rfc2731bis (RFC 2731 is Obsolete) toInformational RFC

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:22:12 +0100

Julian Reschke wrote:
> ...
>> I had occasion to coordinate the transfer of responsibility from the
>> IETF to IEEE for some work, and had to spend significant effort
>> working through the copyright issues and the migration issues
>> (RFC4663). The work being transferred in RFC4663 is an IETF standard,
>> whereas RFC2731 is only Informational, so that could make a lot of
>> difference, but there is simply no discussion at all of copyright
>> issues and migration issues. And the reasons why RFC2731 is not still
>> considered valid (just an earlier version), or why this step to
>> declare the RFC Historic is being done are extremely light. Is it to
>> prevent it being used because this old version and the updated work
>> cannot coexist? or do we just not like this one any more? 
> 
> Well, it's not up-to-date anymore. Don't use it. Look elsewhere.
> 
> If this means that moving it to "Historic" is the wrong thing, I'll be 
> happy to remove that part.
> ...

In the meantime, I asked the IESG for advice on this. Their feedback was 
that "historic" is inaccurate here, as the specified format still is in 
use, and still recommended to be used.

Thus, I have removed the parts of reclassifying as "historic" in 
<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-reschke-rfc2731bis-04.txt>.

BR, Julian