Status of draft-ietf-krb-wg-des-die-die-die
Sam Hartman <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.krb-wg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi. I've talked to our ADs. They say that des-die-die-die can be either standards-track or BCP. I'd prefer that it be a BCP. I think BCP documents are more appropriate for statements of what people should do than standards track. A BCP definitely can update a standards track document when it's describing what we no longer thing is good practice. How would people feel if I asked the editors to reclassify this document as a BCP? If we do choose to deprecate RC4-EXP either in a standards-track or BCP document, we are propbably best invoking the normative down-reference procedure. That adds no time to the process unless the chairs or ADs forget to handle things correctly. I have fairly high confidence that either no one will object to a normative down-referece or they will argue that it's not a normative dependency to point to a document and say "don't do that," so informative is sufficient. Using a normative reference and calling it out in the last call is conservative: probably no one cares. If they do changing to informative is easy. The other direction would require a second last call. _______________________________________________ ietf-krb-wg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg