Shepherd writeup
rfc7857-08

Document shepherd write-up:

   Network Address Translation (NAT) Behavioral Requirements Updates
             draft-ietf-tsvwg-behave-requirements-update-06

1. Summary

Document Shepherd: David Black
Responsible AD: Spencer Dawkins

This is a maintenance draft for NAT behavioral requirements that
were originally specified in the (now closed) behave WG.  As the last 
remaining work item in the behave WG, this draft was transferred to
the tsvwg WG for completion.  See the draft for discussion of its
relationship to RFCs 4787, 5382, 5508 - all three of those RFCs
will be updated by RFC publication of this draft.

Best Current Practice status has been requested because this draft
updates behavioral (and in some cases, operational) guidelines for
NAT functionality, which is widely deployed in the Internet, and
because it is based on experience with implementation and deployment
of the three RFCs that it modifies.

2. Review and Consensus

The Transport Area WG (TSVWG) is a collection of people with varied
interests that don't individually justify their own working groups.

This draft is supported by the portion of the TSVWG that is interested
in NAT behavior, and has received reviews and discussions from
several experts within that community (some of these reviews have been
solicited by the WG chairs).  Outside of the reviews, there has been
limited WG discussion, as the draft was basically complete when it was
transferred to the tsvwg WG.

3. Intellectual Property

This was "interesting" and not in a good way.  During the first WGLC for
this draft, one of the authors indicated that there was previously
disclosed IPR that the WG chairs were not aware of.  The underlying cause
turned out to be some missing "updated by" links in the datatracker -
adding those links caused an existing IPR disclosure to be applied to
this draft.

A second WGLC was run to call attention to the newly applicable IPR
disclosure.  No objections based on the IPR disclosure were received
(but we did get another good expert review of the draft).

With the misisng "updated by" links now in place, each draft author has
stated their direct, personal knowledge that any IPR related to this
document has already been disclosed, in conformance with BCPs 78 and 79.

4. Other Points

idnits 2.13.02 on the -06 version found the disclaimer for pre-RFC5378
work.  This disclaimer is necessary due to the relationship of this draft
to extensive prior IETF work on NATs.

There are no DOWNREFs or IANA Considerations.

Back