On Nov 17, 2014, at 3:25 AM, Rémi Després <[email protected]> wrote: > If this is true (which isn’t clear to me at all ) wouldn’t RFC4821 > deprecation be the right action? > Without that, considering here, implicitly, that RFC4821 is negligible would > be too confusing. > > An alternative, to take your point, could be to add "in view of doubts > expressed about RFC4821 practicability" after "negligible".
If you want to start the process of deprecating RFC 4821, we could certainly do that. I don't think it's a requirement for this, though. We have lots of disused RFCs that have never been deprecated. _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
