Whats in a Name: RFC

1
Whats in a Name RFC

• Jonathan Rosenberg
• Allison Mankin

2
Problem Statement

• Disconnect between reality and industry usage of
  the RFC series
• Industry Usage The document series of the IETF
• Open Standards
• Wide industry representation and industry
  consensus
• Technical review process
• Broad internet community
• Reality
• RFCs may come from outside of IETF
• Can be very difficult to differentiate

3
Example RMT

• Published their documents as experimental
• RFC 3738 Wave and Equation Based Congestion
  Control
• Similar draft that went directly to RFC-ED as
  Informational
• RFC 3754 IP Multicast in Differentiated Services
  Networks
• Subtle ways (at best) to determine that RFC 3738
  was the product of IETF consensus!

4
Example MGCP

• Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP)
• RFC 3435 core protocol (informational)
• Extensions 2897, 3064, 3149, 3441, 3624, 3660,
  3661
• All informational, not the product of the IETF
• Gateway Control Protocol (MEGACO)
• RFC 3525 proposed standard
• Much more MGCP deployed, not clear that industry
  realizes the difference in status
• ADs field complaints on costs of implementing
  both

5
Proposal

• The value to the industry for the moniker RFC
  is bound to output from IETF
• Straw Man
• RFC moniker given to documents that go through
  IETF standards process as defined in RFC 2026
• That process imparts openness, review, appeals,
  and most importantly, community consensus
• Other documents get a different moniker

6
Internal vs. External Labels

• Internal Label is minimum
• Has existed for a while but is often ignored or
  not seen (MGCP)
• New IESG note in 3932 is similar
• External label is ideal
• Widely used today
• Is viewed many times more frequently than the
  document