On Jul 12, 2006, at 7:18 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
I'd also like to note that our specifications are not atomic;
advancing from PS to DS means showing at least two interworking
implementations of every feature and option.
Yes. The questions, at least in my mind, are:
(1) what does it take to demonstrate DS qualifications, and
(2) what is the additional value of Full Standard?
I would like to believe that a well documented interoperability test
constitutes DS qualification; the current DS qualification sets the
bar somewhat higher than that, and I note that few documents actually
achieve that, even though we can daily see implementations
interoperating in the field at PS.
I'm not sure that Full Standard means a lot besides "obsolete".
Personal opinion.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf