[Old-standards] two docs I'd like removed from the list

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

I think Pekka's note pretty comprehensively says "you can't figure out what 
to do with these without working on the subject".

In my book, that puts them beyond the scope of the cruft team, and straight 
into the scope of a special team assembled for the purpose (if the INT ADs 
think that's a reasonable thing to do - I think it's their problem space).

YMMV.

                     Harald

--On 30. november 2004 11:33 +0200 Pekka Savola <pekkas at netcore.fi> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Would people agree that RFCs 1518 and 1519 should be removed from the
>> list?  CIDR is pretty fundamental to the Internet architecture even
>> today, and I'd  suggest they're good candidates for revision and
>> elevation.
>
> I agree that CIDR is a still valid concept, but these documents seem to
> be highly assumptive and overly descriptive about then-current address
> assignment/allocation policies and methodologies, and may be rather
> confusing at face value today.
>
> So, I think there are two alternatives here:
>   1) make these Historic, or
>   2) publish (one) new document on CIDR.
>
> There is no middle ground (i.e., leave them as is) because the contents
> seem to be a bit too old and crufty.
>
> Provided that we can't guarantee 2), I would argue that it would be
> sufficient to keep only RFC1517 (CIDR applicability statement)
> non-Historic, and use that as a basis for revision of CIDR documents if
> folks think that's a good idea.
>
> --
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
> _______________________________________________
> Old-standards mailing list
> Old-standards at eikenes.alvestrand.no
> http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/old-standards
>
>