Improving "Rough Consensus" with Running Code
draft-sheffer-running-code-01

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2012-12-16
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html
Stream WG state (None)
Document shepherd None
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                         Y. Sheffer
Internet-Draft                                                  Porticor
Intended status: Experimental                                  A. Farrel
Expires: June 20, 2013                                           Juniper
                                                       December 17, 2012

             Improving "Rough Consensus" with Running Code
                     draft-sheffer-running-code-01

Abstract

   This document describes a simple process that allows authors of
   Internet-Drafts to record the status of known implementations.  This
   will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration
   to documents that have the benefit of running code and potentially
   reward the documented protocols by treating the documents with
   implementations preferentially.

   The process in this document is offered as an experiment.  Authors of
   Internet-Drafts are encouraged to consider using the process for
   their documents, and working groups are invited to think about
   applying the process to all of their protocol specifications.

   The authors of this document intend to collate experiences with this
   experiment and to report them to the community.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on June 20, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Sheffer & Farrel          Expires June 20, 2013                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                Running Code                 December 2012

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.    Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.    The "Implementation Status" Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   3.    Alternative Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.    Benefits  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.    Process Experiment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.1.  Duration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.2.  Summary Report  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   5.3.  Success Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   6.    Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   7.    Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   8.    IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   9.    Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   10.   References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   10.1. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   10.2. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
         Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Sheffer & Farrel          Expires June 20, 2013                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                Running Code                 December 2012

1.  Introduction

   Most IETF participants are familiar with the saying, "rough consensus
   and running code" [tao], and can identify with its pragmatic
   approach.  However, there are many examples of Internet-Drafts
   containing protocol specification that have gone through to
   publication as Proposed Standard RFCs without implementation.  Some
   of them may never get implemented.

   Over time, a variety of policies have been implemented within the
   IETF to consider running code.  In the Routing Area it used to be a
   requirement that one or more implementations must exist before an
Show full document text