Subject: [sunset4] "Restricted Standard" for IPv4 rather than "Historic"?

From: Dave Plonka <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:40:43 -0400

Hi folks,

While listening to the reasonable comments about Lee's draft in
the sunset4 meeting, I was most struck that this is an exceptional
circumstance that might warrant something other than IPv4 maturing
from "Internet Standard" to "Historic" at this time.

What some would clearly like to do is to clarify, qualify, and/or
restrict how IPv4 is used, and also clearly convey this in the
technical specification RFC.

I propose we create a new maturity level for standards track called
"Restriced Standard" meaning that the standard has been updated by
a new Applicability Statement RFC that restricts its application.

Currently, we clarify the use of a standard in a concurrently-published
Applicability Statement (AS) either contained in a Technical
Specifications RFC or as separate RFC(s):

   https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-3.2

The AS specifies what technical specifications are "required,"
"limited use," "not recommended," etc.:

   https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-3.3

I haven't found a formal AS for either IPv4 and IPv6 specifications.

Does anyone know of a precedent for a standards track protocol
being updated by an AS published long after it matured to "Internet
Standard"?

Thoughts?

Dave

P.S. If the community believes "Restricted Standard" is, well,
too restrictive, perhaps "Qualified Standard?"

-- 
[email-masked]  http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/  Cambridge, MA