Protocol Action: Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers to Proposed (fwd)

Bill Manning <bmanning@isi.edu> Mon, 22 May 1995 22:10 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14259; 22 May 95 18:10 EDT
Received: from [132.151.1.1] by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14255; 22 May 95 18:10 EDT
Received: from venera.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16112; 22 May 95 18:10 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22) id <AA04699>; Mon, 22 May 1995 14:40:51 -0700
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-17) id <AA20010>; Mon, 22 May 1995 14:40:51 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Bill Manning <bmanning@isi.edu>
Message-Id: <199505222140.AA20010@zephyr.isi.edu>
Subject: Protocol Action: Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers to Proposed (fwd)
To: rreq@isi.edu
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 14:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1462

Forwarded message:
> From ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US Mon May 22 13:48:09 1995
> To: IETF-Announce: ;
> Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@ISI.EDU>;
> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@ISI.EDU>;
> Cc: rreq@ISI.EDU
> Sender: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
> From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>;
> Subject: Protocol Action: Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers to Proposed
> 	 Standard
> Date: Mon, 22 May 95 12:22:45 -0400
> X-Orig-Sender: scoya@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
> Message-Id:  <9505221222.aa07248@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US>;
> 
> 
> 
>   The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft "Requirements for IP Version 4
>   Routers" <draft-ietf-rreq-cidr-03.txt> as a Proposed Standard. This
>   document is the product of the Router Requirements Working Group. The
>   IESG contact person is Joel Halpern.
> 
> 
> Technical Summary
> 
>  This document describes the requirements routers need to meet in order
>  to operate safely and effectively in the modern internet. It defines the
>  necessary behaviors, along with suffient explanation of the whys and
>  wherefores to provide support for implementors and answers to questions
> 
> Working Group Summary
> 
>  Much discussion went into this work, and it represent the consensus of
>  the community without dissent.
> 
> Protocol Quality
> 
>  The draft has been reviewed by Joel M. Halpern, the Routing AD, and
>  Scott Bradner, and is sound and good advice.
> 


-- 
--bill