* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

THIS PAGE IS STALE - it does not reflect the move to the new tracker (and the current bug affecting adding RFCs to the tracker), and may not reflect the current (as of Jul2011) conversations around the use of Historic. If it is not clear what to do, please ask your co-ads for advice, and the secretariat for help with the tracker.

There are two ways to use the I-D Tracker to move documents to historic status.

If the move to historic is non-controversial and requires little or no explanation, use the I-D tracker to search for the relevant RFC and click the "Add" button (at the moment, this will fail - send email to the secretariat instead). This allows you to create last call text to change the document status to historic and then put it on the IESG agenda for approval. Custom last call text has to be generated for this case (note to IESG: example text would be helpful here).

For controversial cases or when it would be useful to have the reason for moving something to historic recorded for posterity as an RFC, this is done by combining publication of an informational document explaining the move to historic status with the actual status change approval. In this case, add the informational document using the tracker and then customize the last call text. Here's example text:

To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org> 
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
Subject: Last Call: draft-mrose-apex-historic (Reclassification of the 
         APEX RFCs to Historic) to Informational RFC 
Reply-to: ietf@ietf.org

The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
reclassifying the following RFCs as Historic:

RFC 3340 'The Application Exchange Core'
RFC 3341 'The Application Exchange (APEX) Access Service'
RFC 3342 'The Application Exchange (APEX) Option Party Pack, Part Deux!'
RFC 3343 'The Application Exchange (APEX) Presence Service'

The IESG will also consider publication of "Reclassification of the APEX
RFCs to Historic" <draft-mrose-apex-historic-01.txt> as an
Informational RFC.

...

where "..." is the text normally generated by the I-D Tracker. The ballot approval text also needs to be customized. Once it's customized, you may need to update the draft revision numbers manually as the "Regenerate Approval Announcement Text" button will destroy the customizations. (For this example, the responsible AD didn't know about the first mechanism but found examples of the second mechanism in the last call archives, however the IESG may decide not to publish the informational RFC as it was trivial).

Note that RFC 2026 Section 6.2 last paragraph encourages the IESG to review proposed/draft standards that have not progressed for 24 months and each 12 months thereafter and consider moving them them to historic.