Subject: Implementation reports

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 13:49:10 -0400

Chairs,
     One part of advancing a standard from Proposed to Internet Standard
is documenting that there "are at least two independent interoperating
implementations with widespread deployment and successful operational
experience" (from RFC 2026). A frequent, but not required, approach is
the creation of implementation and deployment reports.  The information
provided in these reports is used by the IESG to assess the readiness of
a standard to be advanced.  Generally, the information in these reports
is only useful for a short period of time (during the advancement
process). However, there are some implementation reports that may
contain information that has lasting value that will persist over the
years (without being maintained) and would be beneficial to readers long
after the specification has been advanced.

     Traditionally, implementation reports have been delivered to the
IESG as text writeups via e-mail and made available via:

http://www.ietf.org/iesg/implementation-report.html

However, there have been a smaller number of cases where the reports
have been formulated as drafts targeted for publication as RFCs.

     The IESG asks you, as chairs, to consider which formulation is more
appropriate when requesting advancement of a standard.  A large majority
of the implementation reports will fall into the first category and be
made public via the above link.  If you feel that the information being
recorded contains useful, persistent data appropriate for publication as
an RFC, consider the draft approach.

     Your shepherding AD and the IESG are more than willing to assist
you in the decision process if there are questions as to which approach
is most appropriate.  Just ask.

     Please note that the current process experiment described in RFC
6982 (implementation status at time of publication request) should
provide useful information for these implementation reports, regardless
of their formulation.

Regards,
Brian (for the IESG)