On 2011-01-30 09:52, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
>
> On 1/29/2011 12:10 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> On 2011-01-27 16:29, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>>> 4/ as part of #3 - the rules should also specifically deal with
>>> the following pp from 2026
>>>
>>> The requirement for at least two independent and interoperable
>>> implementations applies to all of the options and features of the
> ...
>> Actually the draft does not appear to require interoperability testing
>> at all:
>>
>> "* There are a significant number of implementations with
>> successful operational experience."
>>
>> Is that intentional? I thought interop was generally regarded as
>
>
> People are confusing testing with use. Those are two different kinds of
> "interoperability", with the latter being far more stringent.
>
> The new draft specifies the latter. And it quite intentionally does not
> specify the former.
Please point to the text that requires *any* kind of interoperability
being demonstrated by running code. "successful operational experience"
does not state or imply interoperation between independent implementations.
This is a big change in principle from 2026, which is not what is advertised
on the box as "primarily a reduction from three IETF standards track
maturity levels to two."
I want a two stage process, but I don't want to lose interoperability as
an explicit criterion. To me, that's always been the meaning of the
"running code" slogan.
Brian
>
> While "testing" is extremely important for when doing development, there
> is no reason that the IETF should be required to include that very
> intermediary activity within our standards process.
>
> So the new proposal has two phases:
>
> 1) Specification
>
> 2) Use
>
> That there are intermediate real-world phases, such as development,
> testing and deployment is essential, of course. But there is nothing
> essential in having the IETF mark completion of any of those
> intermediate phases.
>
> d/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf