How to handle URIs for old protocols

[Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>]

Greetings again. At the request of the folks at the URI BOF in San 
Francisco, I wrote draft-hoffman-rfc1738bis-00.txt. Its purpose is to 
allow RFC 1738 to be made historic. An interesting wrinkle has come 
up.

My draft copies the old URI info for dusty protocols such as Gopher 
(among others). Some folks have asked that I drop these descriptions, 
forcing people who care about those URI schemes to refer to the 
will-be-historic RFC 1738. However, the definition of the Gopher 
protocol is not historic; it's just dusty.

Does the IESG see an issue with making historic the URI specification 
for a non-historic protocol? If not, I'm happy to remove them from my 
draft. If you do have an issue with it, I'll leave them in.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium