Right. Arguably, it's rather the second bullet that may be a better candidate. We are not concerned (and never were) with 'Protocol Conformance' but rather with interoperability. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swmike@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 3:24 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: IETF turns 30 > > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > > > Happy Birthday! > > > > So, at IETF 1 the following areas of concern were identified: > > > > IETF Areas of Concern - > > o Protocol Development and Stabilization, o Protocol Conformance, o An > > Implementors Support Organization, o Internet Performance > > Measurements, o ISO Conversion. > > > > Only one of them seems clearly out of scope 30 years after. > > I imagine you mean the last bullet point? It was only the last 1-2 IETFs where > a new draft was published that (again) suggested a profile to carry IS-IS over > IPv6, so depending on what you mean by "ISO conversion", I'm not so sure > this is out of scope yet :P > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx