Juergen Schoenwaelder píše v St 06. 09. 2017 v 13:10 +0200: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:34:33AM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > I would prefer if it status was inherited (as an errata to 6020, 7950). > > Erratas are not a tool to change a specification. You have to write > and RFC that updates 6020 and 7950 in order to change what these RFCs > say. This requires full WG / IETF consensus since the change affects > implementations.
A current node with a deprecated ancestor doesn't make sense, so it looks like an omission. IMO, a technical erratum is then appropriate. Regarding the documentation needs, 6087bis could recommend not to rely completely on the inheritance of deprecated status, and put it to other places for documentation purposes (using common sense). Lada > > /js > -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
