Subject: [Isis-wg] Comment on draft-ietf-isis-hmac-04.txt and draft-ietf-isis-traffic-05.txt

From: Les Ginsberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 09:28:51 -0700

The above two drafts reference RFC 1142. They should not.

RFC 1142 was published in 1990 based on an early draft of what eventually 
became ISO 10589:1992. As such, it contains a number of defects which were 
corrected prior to the publication of the 1992 ISO standard. Because of 
this it should NOT be used as a reference for the protocol.

As I recall, a number of questions have been brought to this list over the 
years because some folks thought that RFC 1142 was a legitimate reference 
and rediscovered defects which had long ago been corrected. It would be a 
good thing if RFC 1142 was moved to OBSOLETE status.

In any case, drafts should not reference this RFC.

Now that the second edition of ISO 10589 is an official standard, it would 
also be good if drafts referenced the newer version:

"ISO, "Intermediate system to Intermediate system routeing
       information exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the
       Protocol for providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service
       (ISO 8473)," ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition."

    Les

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

---

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 16:53:23 -0700

Les,

  Wrt RFC1142, I did check with JTC1 guys and they do not mind us
  publish the latest version of the standard as an INFO IETF RFC.
  If we did, the new publication would obsolete 1142. Micah was
  planning to start running with this in April, by the way ;-)

  If the new RFC takes long or doesn't get published, we can move
  1142 to Historic (the way of saying it's obsolete.)

-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/

---

From: Micah Bartell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 15:59:07 -0500

Alex,

The work is already in progress.

/mpb