- From: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 11:35:35 -0800
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
For those of you who are sending in interoperability reports, thanks. For those of you who have not yet sent one in who have HTTP/1.1 implementations, we encourage you to do so as soon as possible. See: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Forum/Reports/ Please NOTE: for the purposes of the IETF, a feature is tested if you've implemented and tested it. It does NOT have to be in shipping or otherwise availabile software. (so much the better, of course). This is a common confusion. The point of the interoperability report is to show that the protocol has been tested in all regards, not a status report on what is in current shipping product. - Jim To quote from BCP 9, The Internet Standards Process: 4.1.2 Draft Standard A specification from which at least two independent and interoperable implementations from different code bases have been developed, and for which sufficient successful operational experience has been obtained, may be elevated to the "Draft Standard" level. For the purposes of this section, "interoperable" means to be functionally equivalent or interchangeable components of the system or process in which they are used. If patented or otherwise controlled technology is required for implementation, the separate implementations must also have resulted from separate exercise of the licensing process. Elevation to Draft Standard is a major advance in status, indicating a strong belief that the specification is mature and will be useful. The requirement for at least two independent and interoperable implementations applies to all of the options and features of the specification. In cases in which one or more options or features have not been demonstrated in at least two interoperable implementations, the specification may advance to the Draft Standard level only if those options or features are removed. The Working Group chair is responsible for documenting the specific implementations which qualify the specification for Draft or Internet Standard status along with documentation about testing of the interoperation of these implementations. The documentation must include information about the support of each of the individual options and features. This documentation should be submitted to the Area Director with the protocol action request. (see Section 6) A Draft Standard must be well-understood and known to be quite stable, both in its semantics and as a basis for developing an implementation. A Draft Standard may still require additional or more widespread field experience, since it is possible for implementations based on Draft Standard specifications to demonstrate unforeseen behavior when subjected to large-scale use in production environments. A Draft Standard is normally considered to be a final specification, and changes are likely to be made only to solve specific problems encountered. In most circumstances, it is reasonable for vendors to deploy implementations of Draft Standards into a disruption sensitive environment.
Received on Friday, 27 March 1998 11:37:57 UTC