Subject: Re: [Dhcpv6bis] [dhcpv6bis] #156 (XML 3315): Investigate what is required to go with Internet Standard

From: "dhcpv6bis issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 16:29:30 -0000

#156: Investigate what is required to go with Internet Standard

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => complete

Comment:

 RFC6410 trims down the standard tiers from 3 (draft standard, proposed
 standard, internet standard)
 to just 2 (draft standard, internet standard).

 The following advancement procedure from RFC6410 applies:

 {{{
 The IESG, in an IETF-wide Last Call of at least four weeks, confirms
    that a document advances from Proposed Standard to Internet Standard.
    The request for reclassification is sent to the IESG along with an
    explanation of how the criteria have been met.  The criteria are:

    (1) There are at least two independent interoperating implementations
        with widespread deployment and successful operational experience.

    (2) There are no errata against the specification that would cause a
        new implementation to fail to interoperate with deployed ones.

    (3) There are no unused features in the specification that greatly
        increase implementation complexity.

    (4) If the technology required to implement the specification
        requires patented or otherwise controlled technology, then the
        set of implementations must demonstrate at least two independent,
        separate and successful uses of the licensing process.

    After review and consideration of significant errata, the IESG will
    perform an IETF-wide Last Call of at least four weeks on the
    requested reclassification.  If there is consensus for
    reclassification, the RFC will be reclassified without publication of
    a new RFC.
 }}}

 Once 3315bis is published, we should be good on 2 and 4, and hopefully
 achieve 3 in the near future. However, we can't claim 1 until the changes
 are implemented and deployed by several major implementors. Once that is
 done, we should be able to start the status change procedure. This is
 something that can be done for existing RFC and the status change does not
 require re-publication.

 In my opinion this addresses the question whether we can try to publish as
 Internet Standard. We can't. I will talk with Bernie, but it seems like a
 good idea to create a DHC milestone some time in the future (in 2 years
 maybe?) to evaluate adoption of 3315bis and possibly start standards tier
 advancement procedure if appropriate.

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |       Owner:
  [email-masked]         |  [email-masked]
     Type:  task                     |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  P1 blocker               |   Milestone:  E Editor issues
Component:  XML 3315                 |  Resolution:  complete
 Keywords:                           |    Due Date:  09/05/2016
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/dhcpv6bis/ticket/156#comment:1>
dhcpv6bis <http://tools.ietf.org/group/dhcpv6bis/>