Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz> writes: > Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> writes: > >> I am also confused by the difference between deprecated and >> obsoleted. I guess the yang model interprets the IANA regitry, but the >> registry has no official column designation for this. I wonder if it >> should be given one. I also then suggest that the terms obsoleted and >> deprecated be merged into one term. > > Actually, I copied the corresponding text from RFC 7224, but I am not > sure whether the deprecated status is used at all in IANA registries. If > not, we can remove that part and leave only "obsolete". Unless somebody > knows the answer right away, I will ask IANA about it.
Don't know if it is directly relevant to DNS, but the RFC6918 abstract makes this a question of standardisation: A number of ICMPv4 message types have become obsolete in practice, but have never been formally deprecated. This document deprecates such ICMPv4 message types, thus cleaning up the corresponding IANA registry. The corresponding ICMPv4 type registry does of course use the term "deprecated" for these. Translated to DNS, this would make MB etc "obsolete" until some future standards track RFC officially "deprecates" them. Makes sense? Bjørn _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
