RFC3627 to Historic status
draft-george-6man-3627-historic-01

Abstract

This document moves RFC3627 (Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers Considered Harmful) to HISTORIC status to reflect the updated guidance contained in RFC6164 (Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter-Router Links). While a standards track document already supersedes an informational document and therefore RFC6164 is the appropriate guidance to follow when the two documents are in conflict, this links the two documents so that it is clearer that the IETF has updated guidance on the matter.

Status of this Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on April 12, 2012.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Acknowledgements
• 3. IANA Considerations
• 4. Security Considerations
• 5. References
• 5.1. Normative References
• 5.2. Informative References
• Author's Address

1. Introduction

This document moves RFC 3627 [RFC3627] to HISTORIC status in accordance with RFC 2026 [RFC2026]. It has been superseded by RFC 6164 [RFC6164]. While a standards track document already supersedes an informational document and therefore RFC6164 is the appropriate guidance to follow when the two documents are in conflict, this may not be clear to casual readers who are not completely familiar with the differences in IETF document types. This document adds the necessary link between the two documents so that those referring to RFC3627 for guidance will see that it has been obsoleted by updated guidance on the matter, thus hopefully eliminating any confusion that may be present.

2. Acknowledgements

Thanks to Brian Carpenter, Bob Hinden, and Ron Bonica for guidance on the matter, and to Pekka Savola and Miya Kohno and the other authors of 6164 for their support.

3. IANA Considerations

This memo includes no request to IANA.

4. Security Considerations

This draft introduces no new security considerations.

5. References

5.1. Normative References

5.2. Informative References

Author's Address