[Old-standards] Re: telnet RFCs [Re: List of Old Standards to be retired]

[Jeffrey Altman]

"implemented in widely deployed implementations" means that it is still 
in use.  things like Cisco routers, VMS, IBM mainframes and 
minicomputers, etc. implement these RFCs.

Jeffrey Altman


Pekka Savola wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> 
>> Eliot Lear wrote:
>>
>>> If you see a document on the list below and you know it to be in use, 
>>> would you please reply to this message indicating the RFC number, and 
>>> whether you believe the doc should be advanced beyond proposed?  
>>> Also, if you know of work to update anything on the list below, 
>>> please include that.  A note along these lines is generally 
>>> sufficient to remove a document from the list below.
>>
>>
>> I am a fairly good contact point for most things "TELNET".  Back in 
>> June 1999 the Application Area Directors, Keith Moore and Patrik 
>> Falstrom, performed a review of TELNET RFCs to move unused ones to 
>> HISTORIC.  This was done in consultation with the subscribers to the 
>> telnet-wg at bsdi.com mailing list. All of the remaining Telnet options 
>> were determined to be implemented in various widely deployed 
>> implementations.
> 
> 
> I don't recall anyone said that an implemented RFC (even widely 
> implemented) could not be made historic.  Above, Eliot specifically 
> asked about *know it to be in use*.  Implemented does not imply that 
> though it's a prerequisite for considering whether an option is actually 
> being used anymore.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3256 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/old-standards/attachments/20041220/8498e738/smime.bin