Moving the Undeployed TCP Extensions RFC 1072, RFC 1106, RFC 1110, RFC 1145, RFC 1146, RFC 1379, RFC 1644, and RFC 1693 to Historic Status
RFC 6247

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 02 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

Comment (2011-03-17)
No email
send info
Thanks for writing this.

(Ron Bonica) Yes

(Adrian Farrel) Yes

Comment (2011-03-16)
No email
send info
I am ballotting "Yes" on this document, but there are a few issues I
would like the author to consider before the document is passed to 
the RFC Editor.

---

Abstract

Please change this text from a "recommendation" to an "action"

---

Surely this is a Historic RFC in its own right? I.e., RFC 1072 et al
are obsoleted by a Historic RFC.

---

Section 2

   The RFC Editor is requested to change the status of the following
   RFCs to Historic [RFC2026]:

I'm confused. Can the status of an existing RFC be changed? I thought
it could only obsoleted.

---

Section 3

This says IANA should mark as "obsolete". Shouldn't you use 
"deprecated"?

I think you also need to tell IANA exactly what references they should
place against each deprecated option.

(David Harrington) Yes

(Sean Turner) Yes

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Alexey Melnikov) No Objection

(Tim Polk) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection