If an existing protocol implementation is conforming to the Draft Standard
version of the protocol specification, it must also be conforming to the
resulting Full Standard version. Hence, specification changes that
create a violation of this requirement are out of scope of the working
group charter.
This part of the charter worries me. It presumes that no Draft Standard can
be ambiguous!
On the off chance that a Draft Standard *is* ambiguous in some way that has
caused two implementations to be non-interoperable, but arguably
conforming, it seems that the WG must drop the Standard from consideration
without any chance of some engineering judgement (or even horse-trading) to
get the implementations to become interoperable and to resolve the
ambiguity.
OTOH, maybe that WAS the intent of the charter.
--
Bill McQuillan <McQuilWP(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf