> -----Original Message----- > From: Hadmut Danisch [mailto:hadmut@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 10:41 AM > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Cc: rfc-editor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Mandatory numeric examples in crypto-RFCs? > > Hi, > > I am currently debugging some ISAKMP problems and thus using > RFCs like 2085, 2412, etc. about cryptographic algorithms and > data formats. > > > Such RFCs are sometimes a little bit ambiguous or difficult to read > since details are spread around the paper. When implementing such > algorithms or data parsers, you don't know whether the implementation > is correct without a test case, e.g. feeding in some examples and > check whether the result is what is expected. > > > I'd therefore propose that every RFC dealing with crypto algorithms or > data formats has to have a mandatory appendix section with examples to > be used as a test case. (Every I-Draft should have.) The RFC Editor notes that we were CC'd on this message. That seems to imply that you wish us to enforce this requirement. We wonder: is this limited to standards-track documents? (If so, the IESG would be a more appropriate place to enforce your suggestion.) The RFC Editor could take on this as a requirement for all RFC publication, but note that it involves a content decision that is outside the normal and current limits of the RFC editorial function. In the past, the RFC Editor was basically motivated by a desire to serve the IETF community, and we would have been happy to undertake this. It is not clear that this will continue to be the case in the future. Certainly, IAB action will be required to realize your request. RFC Editor/bb _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf