For now, I am fine either ways (reference or note) as long as the up-to date recommendations documents are "obviously" visible on the IANA page. If we want to have further changes, I believe we should have a sort of policy document that clarify / define the IANA page. In curdle we have long being confronted to the issue what reference should be placed in the IANA page as well as what information should be placed as a reference: the document creating the registry, document updating this document, the document describing the algorithm, the document obsoleting... There is no one single rule! I also believe that is an important document to have and we should keep that simple. In a future version of the IANA page, I am personally, I am in favor of having clearly deprecated/obsolete/historic in the column.
Yours, Daniel On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 10:20 AM Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, Tero Kivinen wrote: > > > No. Only change the reference to the document that says those > > algorithms are MUST NOT. You wanted clickable link to document that > > will tell the status. This results in what you asked for.... > > > > Having obsolete or deprecated in reference column in addition to the > > RFC8221/8247 reference would be bigger change, and then I think > > die-die-die document would be better reference and that document could > > ask IANA to make the changes. > > Shouldn't that be a 8221bis / 8247bis document ? > > I'm happy to write a separate diediedie document, but it would sort of > break the cycle of our IKE and ESP/AH document updates? > > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec >
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
