Elwyn,
 
> Maybe somebody ought to write a very short I-D just to set the record 
> straight.

It looks like there was at least one attempt to do that; see:

http://mirrors.isc.org/pub/www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-newman-netw
ork-byte-order-01.txt

I don't know the status of this effort, and I don't know whether
there would be support to revive it. But, this subject seems to
to fall within the auspices of the (unwritten) "IETF Reference
Architecture".

I sent a note to the IAB a while back asking why there wasn't
a "Terminology of the IETF" reference document (i.e., one that
defines common terms like "link", "node", "host", "router",
etc.). But, the more I think about it, the more I think that
this would be counter-culture to the way the IETF works.

IMHO, the "IETF Reference Architecture" exists, but it
is documented in a "bottom-up" fashion and is fragmented
across the standards-track RFCs. To bring the fragmented
pieces into a single document that captures the IETF
architecture would seem like a worthy goal, but would
it be acceptable to the "Tao" of the IETF?

Do we need a more detailed and unified "IETF Reference
Architecture" document, or are existing documents like
RFC1958 enough?

Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to