Re: graveyard: deprecate->historic
Dan Harkins <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipsec |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 12/23/19 10:46 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Since we're in pedantic process mode... [snip] > Perhaps something like "IKEv1 is no longer relevant for Internet > systems" would work, though I suspect we could even get away without such > an intro sentence and just dive in straight with "Systems running IKEv1 > should be upgraded and reconfigured to run IKEv2. See that's the thing. There is nothing compelling to force the change away from "no longer relevant" so people still use it. If there was something compelling to make people want to change we wouldn't be forced to do this, sigh, die die die nonsense. Perhaps, "we're the IETF and we are really serious now". That should dispel all doubt in whoever happens to read this RFC. That way we won't need a die die die die or a die die die die die die. Dan. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec