graveyard: deprecate->historic

Sean Turner <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ipsec
Message-ID <[email protected]>
warning: process mumbo jumbo follows

Technically, I think that s3 of draft-pwouters-ikev1-ipsec-graveyard is trying to do is move IKEv1 to historic.  IKEv1 is already obsoleted by RFC 4036, but that’s not quite the same thing as moving what was a standards track document to “historic”.  The various way to move an RFC to historic is described in this IESG statement {0].  Since there’s already a draft going, it seems like #3 is the path.

The question is whether there should be two drafts: one that moves RFC 2409 to historic and the other deprecates the algorithms.  I wouldn’t be hard over on splitting, but it’s probably better to use the “historic” terminology in s3. I suggest the following changes:

0: Tweak abstract

OLD:

 This document deprecates Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1) and
 additionally deprecates a number of algorithms that are obsolete.

NEW:

 This document moves Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1) to
 Historic status.  It also deprecates a number of algorithms that
 are obsolete and closes all IKEv1 registries.

1: Tweak intro

OLD:

 This document specifies the deprecation of
 IKEv1, and requests IANA to close all IKEv1 registries.

NEW:

 This document moves IKEv1 to to Historic status, and
 requests IANA to close all IKEv1 registries.

2: Change section title

s/Deprecating IKEv1/RFC 2409 to Historic

spt

[0] https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/designating-rfcs-historic-2014-07-20/
[1] 
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.