Subject: Obsoleting RFC 1264?

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:40:04 -0700

[I've bcc'd this message to the int-area list, but I'd
like the discussion to occur on the Routing area list.
There's not much other traffic on the Routing area list
so I encourage int-area subscribers to pick it up for
this thread.]

Dear friends,

  There was quite a bit of discussion at the last IETF meeting,
in the Routing Area and Internet Area meetings, about
draft-fenner-zinin-rtg-standard-reqts.  The discussion
was quite split, with strenuous arguments on both sides of
the issue.  I'd like to float the opposite plan as a trial
balloon: declare RFC1264 obsolete.  I believe that 
a) the existing (business, etc.)  incentives against deploying
something prematurely in the Internet are sufficient, and
b) the lack of an RFC doesn't prevent something's deployment.

  All the rules serve to do is to increase the work on the
working groups and the ADs, and make the IETF appear to be
a bureaucratic organization that makes it difficult to publish
good ideas.  The barriers against bad ideas are still in place:
- The judgement of the Working Group
- The judgement of the IESG
- The IESG [presumably delegating the task to the Routing ADs]
  can still ask for implementation/deployment experience if
  it appears to be needed.

I have just spent too long watching the barriers work against
good ideas.

  Bill

----- Begin forwarded message:

From: [email-masked]
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-00.txt
Date: Wed, May 31 12:50:02 
To: [email-masked]
Reply-to: [email-masked]

	Title		: RFC 1264 is Obsolete
	Author(s)	: B. Fenner
	Filename	: draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-00.txt
	Pages		: 5
	Date		: 2006-5-31
	
RFC 1264 was written during what was effectively a completely
different time in the life of the Internet.  It prescribed rules to
protect the Internet against new routing protocols that may have
various undesirable properties.  In today's Internet, there are so
many other pressures against deploying unreasonable protocols that we
believe that existing controls suffice, and the RFC 1264 rules just
get in the way.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fenner-obsolete-1264-00.txt

----- End forwarded message:

_______________________________________________
routing-discussion mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion

---

From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 20:56:58 -0400

Bill, this sounds like a good proposal
to me for a solid way to move forward and out of
the administrative quagmire we have been in at
the IETF for some time now.  I totally
agree with your arguments below. The mantra of
"running code and rough consensus" should
be the "proof in the pudding" as Yakov likes
to say.

	--Tom