Re: [fquick@qualcomm.com: Re: draft-carroll-dynmobileip-cdma-04.txt]

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

> OK, I've had enough fun with this thread.  It's clear that the authors
> are well past the point of reasonable accommodation on the protocol
> design.  It's been shipped already.

Right. 

> Is it possible to put some form of notation on the RFC when published
> that indicates that the usage in question is "deprecated"?  Deprecated,
> meaning that it exists in the deployed DMU implementation, and therefore
> won't be changed, but that it's a REALLY BAD IDEA (tm) and should not be
> leveraged or reused in any other RADIUS protocol "extension".

Note. The document is already an "RFC Editor Submission"  rather than
an "IETF Submission". By default, it will go out with the following
note at the front (this is right out of RFC 3932):

      This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard.
      The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for
      any purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish
      is not based on IETF review for such things as security,
      congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed
      protocols.  The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
      its discretion.  Readers of this document should exercise caution
      in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment.  See
      RFC 3932 for more information.

One question is whether this is sufficient. (Note: We've been doing
this only for the last 6 months or so...)

What we can also do, is craft a custom note, that says even more,
e.g., that the document does violate the Radius MUST NOT, why that is
considered a bad thing, and that there are more appropriate ways of
doing this... but since this has been deployed and can't be changed,
better to publish.. or something.

I can't point to a similar example note right off, as this document is
fairly unique in what it's doing (with regards to IETF standards) and
RFC 3932 is relatively new.

I'm willing to help wordsmith such a note, if that is what folk thing
is appropriate. (I personally think such a note would be approriate --
I'm in favor of truth-in-advertising.)

Thomas