|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Published as IETF Proposed Standard
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
3084 is referenced in 3.1 Terms defined elsewhere,
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=3084
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
COPS has seen limited implementation. The IETF has decided that COPS was a dead end, and is not interested in extending it further. That has given the ITU-T de facto permission to create its own extensions independently of the IETF. Q.3304.1 does not extend COPS at the protocol level, but does extend its scope of applicability through definition of a new PIB.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
IETF Proposed Standard. No IETF activity likely to modify it.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
Along with RFC 2748 and RFC 3159, provides the basic protocol foundation for draft Rec. Q.3304.1.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
NOTE - This document pre-dates the IETF implementation of the division between normative and informational references./
Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Durham, D., Herzog, S., Raja, R. and A. Sastry, "The COPS (Common Open Policy Service) Protocol", RFC 2748, January 2000./
Yavatkar, R., Pendarakis, D. and R. Guerin, "A Framework for Policy Based Admission Control", RFC 2753, January 2000./
Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Durham, D., Herzog, S., Raja, R. and A. Sastry, "COPS usage for RSVP", RFC 2749, January 2000./
Information processing systems - Open Systems Interconnection, "Specification of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1)", International Organization for Standardization, International Standard 8824, December 1987./
Information processing systems - Open Systems Interconnection - Specification of Basic Encoding Rules for Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1), International Organization for Standardization. International Standard 8825, (December, 1987)./
Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z. and W. Weiss, "An Architecture for Differentiated Service," RFC 2475, December 1998./
McCloghrie, K., Fine, M., Seligson, J., Chan, K., Hahn, S., Sahita, R., Smith, A. and F. Reichmeyer, "Structure of Policy Provisioning Information SPPI", Work in Progress./
NOTE - This document was approved as RFC 3159 (see below)./
McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of Management Information Version 2(SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999./
Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997./
Alvestrand, H. and T. Narten, "Guidelines for writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998./
Moats, R., "Uniform Resource Names (URN) Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997./
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), "Extensible Markup Language (XML)," W3C Recommendation, February, 1998, http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210./
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
Document location: ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3084.txt
|
|
