Re: Host requirements RFCs..

[braden (Bob Braden)]

	From owner-ietf at ISI.EDU Wed May  2 07:20:47 1990
	Date: Wed, 2 May 90 08:36:57 EDT
	From: Bob Stewart <stewart at xyplex.com>
	To: BILLW at mathom.cisco.com
	Cc: ietf at ISI.EDU
	In-Reply-To: William "Chops" Westfield's message of Tue 1 May 90 14:49:00-PDT <12586296024.28.BILLW at MATHOM.CISCO.COM>
	Subject: Host requirements RFCs..

	I second Bill Westfield's sigh about checking off the do/don'ts from copies of
	the requirements pages.  I just did it, too.  I doubt that most of the people
	who pick up on that trick will understand what they get back.  Many of them
	will be scared off by the painfully honest who admit that their terminal
	server doesn't do the things a general host must, or confused and suspicious
	of attempts to explain.

	It would be nice if the requirements were clearer about applicibility in
	special purpose hosts.  Like it or not, with all us vendors in the game, the
	average level of sophistication in the Internet community can only decrease
	(not from us, from our customers! :-} ).  Commercial success brings its own
	set of problems and responsibilities.

I have a concrete proposal.  Suppose we publish a new RFC that gives an
"interpretation" of RFC-1122&3 appropriate to special-purpose hosts
like terminal servers.  Are there any other examples?  This RFC could
effectively soften a few of the requirements for this particular case, and 
it would give the vendors something to point the procurement agents at.
Done honestly and carefully, I think it would have the effect of
STRENGTHENing the impact of RFC-1122&3.

Bob Braden