RE: WG dcoument status

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Mmm.. RFC1264 says on page 4, pls note items 4) and 5):

  
  4.0 Requirements for Proposed Standard

   1) Documents specifying the Protocol and its Usage.  The
      specification for the routing protocol must be well written such
      that independent, interoperable implementations can be developed
      solely based on the specification.  For example, it should be
      possible to develop an interoperable implementation without
      consulting the original developers of the routing protocol.

   2) A Management Information Base (MIB) must be written for the
      protocol.  The MIB does not need to submitted for Proposed
      Standard at the same time as the routing protocol, but must be
      at least an Internet Draft.

   3) The security architecture of the protocol must be set forth
      explicitly.  The security architecture must include mechanisms for
      authenticating routing messages and may include other forms of
      protection.

   4) One or more implementations must exist.

   5) There must be evidence that the major features of the protocol
      have been tested.

   6) No operational experience is required for the routing protocol
      at this stage in the standardization process.

Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yakov Rekhter [mailto:yakov@juniper.net]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:58 PM
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Cc: Kireeti Kompella; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: WG dcoument status 
> 

.. snip ..

> > showing up.... In other words... it might be good if people start to
> > report implementation and interoperability test reults.
> 
> Please note that in the RTG area (rfc1264) there is no requirement
> for a Proposed Standard to have (a) more than one implementation, and
> (b) for these implementations to be interoperable.
> 
> Yakov.
>