RFC 1643 to Historic?

At the IETF52 meeting the possibility of moving RFC 1643 to Historic
status was discussed, as stated in the following item from the minutes:

   o issue on rfc1643 - 2 current versions of the Ethernet mib. - do we
   move it to historic, full standard? Should we put in our current draft
   an explanation of why there are 2 drafts. Some vendors are using
   rfc1643 with private mibs.

To expand on this is more detail, the problem is that RFC 1643 supports
only 10 Mbps Ethernet;  however, because it is a full Standard while the
more up-to-date documents (currently RFCs 2665 and 2668, soon to be
replaced by the two drafts draft-ietf-hubmib-etherif-mib-v3-01.txt and
draft-ietf-hubmib-mau-mib-v3-01.txt, respectively) are only at Proposed
Standard, some vendors reportedly implement RFC 1643 plus private MIB
extensions instead of the up-to-date versions of the EthernetLike-MIB and
MAU-MIB.  It was suggested that the WG should ask that RFC 1643 be moved
to Historic status in order to provide a clear signal to vendors that the
document is out-of-date.

My sense is that this is the right thing to do.  Are there any other
opinions?

Mike