Subject: RE: [newtrk] Comments on draft-klensin-newtrk-std-repurposing-00.txt

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 22:43:15 -0700

> I have a, perhaps naive, question: is there any evidence that there
> exist implementors or operators who ignore lower standards level
> documents in favor of higher ones?  (E.g., "I'm running RFC822 (IS)
> rather than RFC2822 (PS) email since *my* mail system needs the extra
> robustness implied by full Internet Standard.")  In other words, does
> anybody who uses this technology make decisions based on standard
> status level?

Speaking as an implementer, the answer is, no, we don't really care. The
importance of a specification is determined by its status in the
community. There will be times where we will feel compelled to implement
an internet draft, because there appear to be wide agreement that it is
needed. There will also be times where we will decide to ignore a
particular RFC, even if it may be a draft standard, because we don't see
any particular market demand. 

In practice, the formal status only makes a difference in formal
scenarios, e.g. government procurements.

-- Christian Huitema

.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2004 07:20:50 -0500

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
To: "Aaron Falk" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>

> any particular market demand.

FWIW, my perhaps naive impression is that these days people care least 
at the top, and at the bottom, of the protocol stack (the battle in 
SubIP was to get people to care that the tunneling mechanisms were 
even RFCs), but that's not to say that other people cared a whole 
bunch more.

YMMV...

Spencer 

.