🚀 go-pugleaf

                             - OSITEL/400 message -

Verursacher:                      C=DE;A=DBP;P=FGAN;O=FFM;OU=RUFVAX;S=bel
Erstempfaenger:                   C=de;A=dbp;P=dfn;OU=zpl;S=win-ip/c
Betreff:                          hinweise fuer gateways

 pp 18
 
 Message  18  5322 29 Mar 90  
 
 From: "Phillip G. Gross" <pgross@NRI.Reston.VA.US>
 To: iab@venera.isi.edu
 Cc: iesg@NRI.Reston.VA.US, ietf@venera.isi.edu
 Subject: IGP Recommendations
 Posted-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 90 08:59:49 EST
 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (6.5 4/17/89)
 
 
 
 To: the IAB
 From: the IESG
 Subject: Standardization of Intra-AS routing protocols
 cc: IETF
 
 
 1) General Recommendation on Standardizing Routing Protocols
 
 There is a pressing need for a high functionality *open* Intra-AS 
 Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) for the TCP/IP protocol family.  
 Users and network operators have also expressed a strong need for 
 routers from different vendors to interoperate.
 
 Based on these two requirements, the IESG hereby recommends that
 one high functionality routing protocol be designated as the 
 "Recommended" Standard IGP for routers in the Internet.  Other 
 routing protocols may also be designated as "Elective" standards.
 
 It is the intent that all developers of Internet routers make the 
 "Recommended" standard IGP available in their products.  To help 
 ensure that this IGP is available to all users, the IETF Router 
 Requirements Working Group will be directed to indicate in their 
 document that conformant routers must implement the standard IGP.
 
 However, it is not the intent to discourage the use of other routing 
 protocols in situations where there may be sound technical reasons to 
 do so.  This recommendation is meant to *enable* multi-vendor router 
 interoperation with a modern high functionality routing protocol.  It 
 is not otherwise meant to dictate what routing protocol can be used 
 in a private environment.
 
 Therefore, developers of Internet routers are free to implement, and
 network operators are free to use, other "Elective" Internet standard 
 routing protocols, or proprietary non-Internet-standard routing 
 protocols, as they wish.
 
 Reference:  Please see RFC 1140, "IAB Official Standards" (replaces 
 RFC 1130) for a listing and status of current Internet standards.
 RFC 1140 also describes the Internet standards process established 
 by the IAB.
 
 
 2) Recommendation on Specific Intra-AS Routing Protocols
 
 During the February 6-9 IETF meeting at Florida State University 
 (specifically at the IESG meetings of February 8th and 9th), the IESG 
 discussed the question of standardizing Intra-AS (ie, IGP) routing 
 protocols for the TCP/IP protocol family.  The two protocols under 
 discussion were the Dual IS-IS and OSPF.  Both protocols use the SPF 
 routing algorithms.
 
 OSPF was developed by the IETF OSPF Working Group.  The OSPF specification 
 was published as RFC 1131 in October 1989.  There is a publicly available 
 implementation for Berkeley Unix, and there is at least one vendor product 
 which is now undergoing deployment in several regional networks.
 
 IS-IS (ISO Draft Proposal 10589) is an OSI proposed protocol for Intra-AS 
 routing.  IS-IS products are not widely available, but variations of DP 
 10589 are being used operationally by at least two vendors.
 
 Dual IS-IS is an enhancement of DP 10589 to support IP in tandem with 
 CLNP.  Dual IS-IS is being developed by the IETF IS-IS Working Group.  
 The current specification of the Dual IS-IS is available in the 
 Internet-Draft directories as file DRAFT-IETF-ISIS-SPEC-00.PS.  There 
 are plans in progress to develop a publicly available implementation 
 for Berkeley Unix.
 
 The IESG, reflecting the discussion in the IETF plenary at FSU, decided 
 that both protocols need substantial operational experience before either 
 could be made full Internet standards or recommended to the IAB as the 
 "Recommended" IGP for the TCP/IP protocol family.  
 
 The practice within the IETF has been to allow a protocol to begin the 
 standards process (i.e., be given the designation "Proposed Standard") 
 prior to gaining field experience, but extensive field experience *is* 
 required prior to advancing to either "Draft Standard" or full Internet 
 Standard.
 
 Therefore, the IESG recommends that OSPF be designated a Proposed Standard 
 at this time.  Further review and advancement as an Internet standard will 
 await the outcome of current ongoing field trials.
 
 The IETF and IESG have expressed interest in the integrated routing that 
 is promised by the Dual IS-IS, but also expressed concern about potential 
 complexity and side-effects.   Other schemes for running ISO and IP 
 side-by-side have been proposed and demonstrated in practice, and a 
 comparison needs to be undertaken in a systematic manner.
 
 Such issues can only be resolved through extensive field experience.  The 
 IESG will re-examine the issue of standardizing Dual IS-IS when the Dual 
 IS-IS specification matures to the point of being published as an RFC and 
 has had some field experience.
 
 Phill Gross
 IESG Chair
 
.
original: C=DE;A=DBP;P=FGAN;"MRUFVAX202900330111232-AGn"
not delivered to:
    recipient: C=de;A=dbp;P=dfn;OU=zpl;S=win-ip/c
    Reason: unableToTransfer
    Diagnostic: unrecognizedORName