-----Original Message-----
From: Hadmut Danisch [mailto:hadmut(_at_)danisch(_dot_)de]
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 10:41 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: rfc-editor(_at_)rfc-editor(_dot_)org
Subject: Mandatory numeric examples in crypto-RFCs?
Hi,
I am currently debugging some ISAKMP problems and thus using
RFCs like 2085, 2412, etc. about cryptographic algorithms and
data formats.
Such RFCs are sometimes a little bit ambiguous or difficult to read
since details are spread around the paper. When implementing such
algorithms or data parsers, you don't know whether the implementation
is correct without a test case, e.g. feeding in some examples and
check whether the result is what is expected.
I'd therefore propose that every RFC dealing with crypto algorithms or
data formats has to have a mandatory appendix section with examples to
be used as a test case. (Every I-Draft should have.)
The RFC Editor notes that we were CC'd on this message. That
seems to imply that you wish us to enforce this requirement.
We wonder: is this limited to standards-track documents?
(If so, the IESG would be a more appropriate place to
enforce your suggestion.)
The RFC Editor could take on this as a requirement for all RFC
publication, but note that it involves a content decision that is
outside the normal and current limits of the RFC editorial function.
In the past, the RFC Editor was basically motivated by a desire
to serve the IETF community, and we would have been happy to
undertake this. It is not clear that this will continue to
be the case in the future. Certainly, IAB action will be
required to realize your request.
RFC Editor/bb
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf