Re: [Sidrops] proposal to update SIDROPS charter (requirement for multiple implementations before IESG/RFC publication)

[Lukas Tribus <[e-mail]>]

Hello,


On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 15:27, Job Snijders <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I propose some following text detailing a requirement for multiple
> implementations to exist prior to RFC publication will be beneficial to
> the working group.
>
> Our neighbors at the IDR working group are known to have a similar
> requirement, which has dramatically improved the quality of that working
> group's specifications and subsequently the deployability of IDR
> technologies. I hope the same can be achieved in SIDROPS.
>
> IDR participants track implementation reports & interopability testing
> through internet-drafts or their Wiki
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/Protocol%20implementations%20Reports
>
> Here are some examples of what reports can look like:
>
>     https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis
>     https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-rfc5575bis%20implementations
>     https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-large-community%20implementations
>
> Proposed text to add to the SIDROPS charter:
>
> """
>     Specifications produced by the SIDROPS working group are intended to
>     address a practical need where a standard specification can assist
>     both vendors and consumers of cryptographic PKIX products to be
>     assured that a standards conformant implementation will undertake
>     certain functions in a known manner, and that, as appropriate,
>     implementations of the standard specification from different vendors
>     will indeed interoperate in intended ways. The SIDROPS working group
>     requires interopability reports from at least two different
>     implementations of a proposed specification, prior to publication as
>     RFC.
> """

I support this proposal.


Thanks,

Lukas