[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Removing features
> The second is the side point I raised with Margaret: in the
> general case of "things in specifications", removing something
> from a specification does not mean that someone can still use
> it. Deprecation protects such a usage, but removal does not.
Scott's posting made a distinction between adding and removing
features, lumping site-local deprecation into the "removing
features" category. I echoed his terminology.
I agree with you that there is a difference between simply
removing a feature (which might cause serious backwards
compatibility concerns, and could be quite irresponsible in
some cases) and carefully deprecating a feature (while considering
the affects on current implementations and preserving backwards
compatibility). In the IPv6 site-local case, the decision was made
to deprecate site-local addresses, and that is what we are working
to do. The proposals currently on the table reserve the current
site-local prefix, so that it will not be reallocated by IANA.
Fred, I hope that this resolves your technical concern about
this particular case, and I apologize for not making this
distinction clear in my response to Scott.
> That is actually not the
> subject of either appeal, and should not enter into the discussion of
> either appeal,...
As far as I know, there is only one appeal currently open
regarding this subject.
Margaret