At 04:09 PM 10/24/2007, Tom Tucker wrote: >Michael Krause wrote: >> The proper action is to propose a new MPA specification to the IETF - >> it isn't an OFA decision to make. MPA within the IETF was a tough >> fight to get into existence. This particular issue was raised and the >> outcome from that debate is what is in the 1.0 specification (it is a >> standard if I recall not a draft). >It looks to me to be an ID, not an RFC.
The RDDP specifications are in the RFC Editor's queue, therefore they are in-between Internet-Draft and Proposed-Standard status. You can find them on the IETF tracking pages: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/?search_job_owner=&search_group_acronym=RDDP&search_status_id=&search_cur_state=&sub_state_id=&search_filename=&search_rfcnumber=&search_area_acronym=&search_button=SEARCH> "RFC" is just a nickname. The specific document status, Proposed Standard in this case, is the key. RFCs are in fact living documents, but once published their status changes. The idea of "Proposed" is that people implement it, and feed back what works and what doesn't about the protocol. After vetting the protocol by this process, the next step is to modify and/or republish it as a so-called "Draft" standard. In fact, to get to that level we need two or more interoperable implementations. This connection model problem certainly is an interoperability issue. This discussion should be held on the IETF RDDP list. Take this experience back to the protocol and fix it, or deal with it in upper layers and leave the draft as-is. As mentioned, the MPA protocol was far and away the most contentious point of the entire iWARP RDDP stack. It represents many, many compromises, and it's not surprising in hindsight that this issue is surfacing. It means the process is working, remember. Tom. P.S. Internet Standards process: <ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/bcp/bcp9.txt> _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
