> 1) I don't know where the "2 separate implementation" concept is > embedded formally in the ietf structures for approval.
It isn't, for Proposed Standard status, although historically the Routing Area has been tougher than the rest of the IETF because of reasonable concern that a faulty routing protocol can produce more horrible failure modes than pretty much anything else. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4794 may clarify a bit. For advancement to Internet Standard there is a requirement for 2 implementations but that is not germane to the current discussion. (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6410) Sigh. It's embarassing how baroque the IETF process documents have become, but it would be a lot of uninspiring work to clean them up. That's why I've been maintaining this page for a few years now: http://www.ietf.org/about/process-docs.html (And yes, I'm aware it's overdue for an update.) Brian _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
