Re: [OPSAWG] [OPS-AREA] Present day reality of COPS-PR

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

On 2009-10-01 07:32, David Harrington wrote:
...
> As a result of this discussion occuring in IETF, we have found that
> COPS-PR is in real-world use (although we need to vet the claims to
> understand the extent of deployment).

I think we should consider the effort that led to RFC4550
("Getting Rid of the Cruft: Report from an Experiment in Identifying and
Reclassifying Obsolete Standards Documents"). The IESG followed the
recommendations therein and reclassified a large number of standards
track documents to Historic.

The criterion for *not* obsoleting a document during that work were
described as:

"  ...a judgment is necessary as to whether or not a
   protocol is both in use and likely to be supported.  The parameters
   of our experiment were sufficiently conservative to avoid cases where
   protocols were likely to continue to be supported.  That is, anyone
   could remove a document from the list for any reason.  "

If the COPS-PR documents had been candidates for inclusion in RFC4550,
Dave Harrington's message would have been enough to remove them (and
in fact, since they are not Proposed Standards, they wouldn't ever have
been considered).

That doesn't tell us the correct decision here. But it does tell us that
the proposal is stronger than the approach taken in RFC4550.

That was written as the former AD who shepherded RFC4550.

As an individual, I don't believe that COPS-PR and PIBs are a success
story, and I'd be much less conservative in my approach than RFC4550.
So I support the proposal, personally (and as an ex-WG Chair responsible
for one of the RFCs in question).

    Brian