And yet:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/974696/how-can-i-make-the-nfs-server-support-protocol-version-2-in-ubuntu-17-10

I’m not arguing either way, but it’s not the case that old, deprecated 
protocols aren’t still running.

Joe

> On Nov 29, 2018, at 8:29 AM, Ron Bonica <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
>  
> Even if citations weren’t an issue, we are really reaching into the distant 
> past.
>  
> -         NFSv2 was specified by RFC 1094 in 1989.
> o    I was 31 years old then.
> -          NFS2 was obsoleted by NFSv4 (RFC 3010) in 2000.
> -         RFC 3010 was obsoleted by RFC 3530 in 2003
> -         RFC 3530 was obsoleted by RFC 7530 in 2015
> -         We are citing NFSv2 in a draft that will be published in 2019
> o   I will be 61 years old by then.
>  
>                                                                               
>  Ron
>  
>  
> From: Joe Touch <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 9:43 AM
> To: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>
> Cc: Ron Bonica <[email protected]>; int-area <[email protected]>; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-03
>  
> They don’t need to be deleted if you include them deliberately. There is no 
> prohibition on citing such RFCs for your own documents historical background.
>  
> Joe
> 
> On Nov 29, 2018, at 4:06 AM, Stewart Bryant <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> But, always worth including a "do be deleted" note to the reviewers to stop 
> then all sending in feedback about the nits failure.
> 
> Stewart
> 
>  
> On 27/11/2018 20:42, Joe Touch wrote:
> FWIW:
> 
>  
>  
> 
> On 2018-11-27 12:22, Ron Bonica wrote:
> 
> Fred,
> 
> If the NFSv2 and iPERF issues are not blocking, I would like to omit them. 
> The following are rational:
> 
> ...
> - Mechanically, it is difficult to reference an RFC that has been obsoleted 
> in an internet draft. The NIT checker complains bitterly.
>  
> Those complaints are warnings only to help those who cite such documents 
> inadvertently; you can simply ignore them. (I do all the time - esp. for 
> historical discussions that cite early versions of  newer RFCs or historical 
> standards).
>  
> Joe
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>  
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to