Templin, Fred L wrote:
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 think Chris Newman probably works for Sun now. It appears he is
active in sasl.
I think the document needs a discussion/reproduction of the stuff in
Appendix B of RFC 791.
I would be willing to take on updating this doc if Chris doesn't want to
follow through.
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.
I guess there are several different classes of item to consider
- the common terms could well be defined in a wiki - pointing at
relevant RFCs
- there are some fundamental design decisions such as the network byte
order (what else?) which should IMO have RFCs
- there are architectural principles - it is probably about time
somebody took a critical look at RFC 1958 to check it is still up to
date - maybe Brian does this already!
- BCP type advice on how to design certain critical things (generally
done as IAB pronouncements) - opinions on missing important ones
gratefully received!
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?
Interesting question. Have to think what might go into it.
Regards,
elwyn
Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
