Definitions for expressing standards requirements in IANA registries.
draft-ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words-03
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual in gen area)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Ólafur Guðmundsson , Scott Rose | ||
| Last updated | 2015-10-14 (Latest revision 2010-01-27) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Best Current Practice | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews | |||
| Stream | WG state | (None) | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired (IESG: Dead) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Russ Housley | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
RFC 2119 defines words that are used in IETF standards documents to indicate standards compliance. These words are fine for defining new protocols, but there are certain deficiencies in using them when it comes to protocol maintainability. Protocols are maintained by either updating the core specifications or via changes in protocol registries. For example, security functionality in protocols often relies upon cryptographic algorithms that are defined in external documents. Cryptographic algorithms have a limited life span, and new algorithms regularly phased in to replace older algorithms. This document proposes standard terms to use in protocol registries and possibly in standards track and informational documents to indicate the life cycle support of protocol features and operations.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)