Re: [rfc-i] Table of conformance requirements.

[Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>]

I have a script that builds such lists, and have used it for 20-ish 
years at this point in various contexts.

Some example output:

https://www.nostrum.com/~rjsparks/draft-ietf-quick-transport-29-enumreqs.txt

https://www.nostrum.com/~rjsparks/rfc3261-enumreqs.txt

For the most part, its best use has been to help identify when there are 
meaningless, duplicate, or contradictory uses of the BCP14 keywords.

In interop testing (primarily the SIPit), having these requirements 
enumerated this way didn't help drive test behavior or the creation of 
test suites. It turned out that far more context was needed as a 
predicate to "I'm going to check this thing" than the isolated sentence 
containing the requirement. And agreeing on that context often turned 
out to be a subjective exercise (when that happened, I'd help put 
pressure on changing the spec to reduce the probability of different 
interpretations).

So, it's been somewhat helpful in my experience, but not helpful enough 
to try to build extra support for it into, say, the v3 grammar.

RjS

On 6/18/20 2:08 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> There is a whole industry around requirements tracking.
> I’m sure the Ribose people can tell us more about that.
>
>> Each MUST in a specification should have at least one corresponding unit test to check compliance.
> Yeah sure.
>
> RFC 4120:
>     *  Principals MUST keep their secret keys secret.
>
> I’d love to see that unit test :-)
>
> The other problem is that we simply don’t state all requirements in BCP14 language.
> Very often, most requirements are stated in describing an architecture or a protocol; they are phrased as statements of fact.  Extracting and labeling these requirements for requirements tracking is an art form.
>
>> And this needs to be expressible somehow in XML.
> I played around some with using kramdown’s auto-indexing feature for BCP14 keywords.  With today’s xml2rfc, that gives you an index of BCP14 usage.  Not exactly what you want, but just a few lines of kramdown markdown.
>
> I never used the results of these experiments in a document, mainly because the lack of BCP14 language on so many of the actual requirements made the result too sketchy.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest