RFC 1264 Is Obsolete
draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-03
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2012-08-22
|
03 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Dan Romascanu |
2006-11-08
|
03 | (System) | Request for Early review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Stephen Farrell. |
2006-11-01
|
03 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
2006-10-30
|
03 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2006-10-30
|
03 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2006-10-30
|
03 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2006-10-27
|
03 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2006-10-26 |
2006-10-26
|
03 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Amy Vezza |
2006-10-26
|
03 | Jon Peterson | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Jon Peterson |
2006-10-26
|
03 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot comment] The new text in version 3 added a reference to draft-farrel-rtg-manageability-requirements-01. This draft is expired, and there is no direct continuation going on. … [Ballot comment] The new text in version 3 added a reference to draft-farrel-rtg-manageability-requirements-01. This draft is expired, and there is no direct continuation going on. Although I fully sympathize with the intention and support turning draft-farrel-rtg-manageability-requirements into a more permanent reference for manageability requirement I belive that at this phase the reference to this document should bebetter dropped. |
2006-10-26
|
03 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Dan Romascanu has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Dan Romascanu |
2006-10-19
|
03 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed |
2006-10-19
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-03.txt |
2006-10-19
|
03 | Ross Callon | I put this back on the next agenda since an updated document has been submitted and should be out well before the next telechat. |
2006-10-19
|
03 | Ross Callon | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2006-10-26 by Ross Callon |
2006-08-31
|
03 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
2006-08-31
|
03 | Lisa Dusseault | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-08-31
|
03 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund |
2006-08-31
|
03 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot comment] Strong support, but the first point in Dan's Discuss needs fixing. |
2006-08-31
|
03 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Brian Carpenter |
2006-08-31
|
03 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
2006-08-31
|
03 | David Kessens | [Ballot comment] One side of me says that it good to obsolete a document that was too rigid in practise. However, another side makes me … [Ballot comment] One side of me says that it good to obsolete a document that was too rigid in practise. However, another side makes me sad that we take a step away from requiring running code. Personally, I believe we should require running code more often for all IETF produced protocols. Basically, running code should be the norm and we can grant exceptions when sensible. However, this is really an IETF wide issue and this particular document is not the right time & place to have that discussion. |
2006-08-31
|
03 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by David Kessens |
2006-08-30
|
03 | Mark Townsley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Mark Townsley |
2006-08-30
|
03 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot comment] As a random note for other ADs... I was concerned about if there was consensus for this since there seemed to be no … [Ballot comment] As a random note for other ADs... I was concerned about if there was consensus for this since there seemed to be no WGLC comments but reading the lists - I would say there was very strong consensus for this. |
2006-08-30
|
03 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings |
2006-08-30
|
03 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot discuss] Although I am in agreement with the decision of obsoleting RFC1264, I perceive two problems with the current draft: 1. The document … [Ballot discuss] Although I am in agreement with the decision of obsoleting RFC1264, I perceive two problems with the current draft: 1. The document refers the readers to the newtrk wg as the avenue to discuss further changes in the IETF standards process. As newtrk concluded, we need to replace this reference with something else 2. The document emphasizes the aspects related to operational experience and proved interoperability, but RFC1264 was not only about those. Other requirements were specified in RFC1264, related for example to security or the requirement to develop MIB modules for all routing protocols. Security considerations are covered, but there is no mention to manageability requirements, which I believe should replace nowadays mandating a MIB module. I suggest that at least in Section 3 instead of saying only 'We encourage working groups to put measures in place to improve the quality of their output' we talk also about completness of the specification with requirements and protocol actions corresponding to the security and manageability requirements that were specified in RFC1264. |
2006-08-30
|
03 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu |
2006-08-29
|
03 | Sam Hartman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Sam Hartman |
2006-08-29
|
03 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lars Eggert |
2006-08-28
|
03 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Russ Housley |
2006-08-28
|
03 | Ted Hardie | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ted Hardie |
2006-08-24
|
03 | Bill Fenner | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Recuse, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner |
2006-08-23
|
03 | Ross Callon | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Ross Callon |
2006-08-23
|
03 | Ross Callon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ross Callon |
2006-08-23
|
03 | Ross Callon | Ballot has been issued by Ross Callon |
2006-08-23
|
03 | Ross Callon | Created "Approve" ballot |
2006-08-22
|
03 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system |
2006-07-25
|
03 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
2006-07-25
|
03 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
2006-07-25
|
03 | Ross Callon | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2006-08-31 by Ross Callon |
2006-07-25
|
03 | Ross Callon | State Changes to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested by Ross Callon |
2006-07-25
|
03 | Ross Callon | Last Call was requested by Ross Callon |
2006-07-25
|
03 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2006-07-25
|
03 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2006-07-25
|
03 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2006-07-25
|
03 | Ross Callon | Draft Added by Ross Callon in state Publication Requested |
2006-07-12
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-02.txt |
2006-06-19
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-01.txt |
2006-05-31
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-00.txt |