RFC 5704: Uncoordinated Protocol Development Considered Harmful
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document identifies problems that may result from the absence of formal coordination and joint development on protocols of mutual interest between standards development organizations (SDOs). Some of these problems may cause significant harm to the Internet. The document suggests that a robust procedure is required prevent this from occurring in the future. The IAB has selected a number of case studies, such as Transport MPLS (T-MPLS), as recent examples to describe the hazard to the Internet architecture that results from uncoordinated adaptation of a protocol. This experience has resulted in a considerable improvement in the relationship between the IETF and the ITU-T. In particular, this was achieved via the establishment of the "Joint working team on MPLS-TP". In addition, the leadership of the two organizations agreed to improve inter-organizational working practices so as to avoid conflict in the future between ITU-T Recommendations and IETF RFCs. Whilst we use ITU-T - IETF interactions in these case studies, the scope of the document extends to all SDOs that have an overlapping protocol interest with the IETF. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5704
- Published
- November 2009
- Authors
- S. Bryant; M. Morrow; IAB
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IAB
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 15
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5317Joint Working Team (JWT) Report on MPLS Architectural Considerations for a Transport ProfileCurrent
February 2009
- RFC 5654Requirements of an MPLS Transport ProfileCurrent
September 2009
- RFC 5921A Framework for MPLS in Transport NetworksUpdated
July 2010
- RFC 5960MPLS Transport Profile Data Plane ArchitectureUpdated
August 2010
- RFC 5718An In-Band Data Communication Network For the MPLS Transport ProfileCurrent
January 2010
- RFC 5787OSPFv2 Routing Protocols Extensions for Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) RoutingObsoleted
March 2010
- RFC 5586MPLS Generic Associated ChannelUpdated
June 2009
- RFC 5860Requirements for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in MPLS Transport NetworksCurrent
May 2010
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?