Appeal Against moving draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3 to Draft Standard (Robert Elz; 2002-11-05) - 2002-11-05
Appeal - 2002-11-05

Date: tirsdag, november 05, 2002 10:51:13 +0700
From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Subject: Formal Appeal against IESG decision

This is to request that the IESG review, and reverse its
decision to approve for publication as a draft standard the
document draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-11.txt

As previously mentioned in messages to the IESG, this doc
contains features for which the required interoperability
reports (as required in RFC2026) have not been produced, nor
can they genuinely be, as from all accounts, there are not
the required two implementations of the features in question.

The features of the address architecture that have no implementations
(or no documented two implementations in any case) are...

The requirement that all IIDs be 64 bits in global unicast
addresses, other than ones with the first three bits 000.

The requirement that where the 'u' bit (the inverted L bit from
the MAC address) is set, the IID is globally unique.

Each of those could be implemented - implementations could refuse to
allow IIDs to be configured with a length other than 64 (that is,
refuse to allow addresses to be configured on interfaces with a
prefix length other than 64), and could refuse to allow the 'u' bit
to be set unless the IID had been demonstrated to be globally unique.
They don't however.

2026 requires that every feature in a document to be advanced to
draft standard status must have been implemented by at least two
independent implementations (interoperably), and have been documented
as such in the implementation report.

That has not been done here.

Please withdraw this document from publication, or revert its status
to Proposed Standard.

kre

ps: for the RFC editor - delaying publication of this doc until the
IAB appeal that is likely to follow this message has been concluded
would be a very good idea I believe.