Considerations on the Extensibility of IETF protocols
draft-iesg-vendor-extensions-02
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(iesg)
- resurrect requested by Alex Zinin
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Scott O. Bradner , Dr. Thomas Narten | ||
| Last updated | 2007-01-15 (Latest revision 2004-06-07) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Best Current Practice | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired (IESG: Dead) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Brian E. Carpenter | ||
| IESG note | |||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This document discusses issues related to the extensibility of IETF protocols, including when it is reasonable to extend IETF protocols with little or no review, and when extensions need to be reviewed by the larger IETF community. The document also recommends that major extensions to IETF protocols only take place through normal IETF processes or in coordination with the IETF.
Authors
Scott O. Bradner
Dr. Thomas Narten
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)