Re: SHOCK NEWS: Cisco not RFC-1812 compliant

From: Martin Cooper (mjc@cooper.org.uk)
Date: Mon Jan 10 2000 - 18:13:23 EST


> If anything, the RFC should be updated.. RFCs are at most BCP
> documents, not law .. it's really not that shocking. Really.

Yes alright, I was being hyperbolic - but even so, I don't think
the RFC capitalised all the words in the phrase "MUST IMPLEMENT
OSPF" for no reason - according to RFC form, it seems that it is
normally only the adverb ("MUST", "SHOULD", "MAY" etc.) that gets
capitalised - perhaps someone thought that implementing a good IGP
in production routers was important for some reason. ;-)

It strikes me that Cisco's implementation policy in this case
had more to do with marketing people looking to screw more cash
out of customers than a sound engineering reason for not following
the RFC. Of course, I could be wrong.

M.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:08 EDT