ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-two-maturity-levels-06.txt> (Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels) to BCP

2011-06-05 12:52:30
Pete Resnick wrote:
[...]

Section 2.2
(a) Specifically, merge Draft Standard into Internet Standard
(b) Combine criteria from Draft Standard and Standard
(i) Significant number of implementations with successful operational experience
    (ii) No unresolved errata causing interoperational problems
(iii) No unused features, except allow unused features that do not greatly increase implementation complexity
    (iv) Independent patent/licensing for implementations
(c) Remove overt requirement for documentation of interoperability testing

[...]

2.2(b)(i) - This is the current requirement for Internet Standard. I'm fine with that remaining, but object to the removal of any notion of interoperability. If this were changed to "A significant number of interoperable implementations...", I would have no objection.

+1.

2.2(b)(iii) - I would prefer that this be amended to "All unused 'MUST' requirements will be changed to 'SHOULD' requirements." If deployment is interoperable and a feature is unused, it means that the feature was not actually REQUIRED for interoperability. I object to this as it stands.

-1.
If for a protocol X nobody implemented MUST implement security mechanism, I don't think I would like it to be downgraded to a SHOULD. At least not without a good explanation.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-two-maturity-levels-06.txt> (Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels) to BCP, Alexey Melnikov <=