|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
approved
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
Revised G.9973 enables the Local L2 Agent to transmit LLDP Data Unit (LLDPDU) frames over the non-Ethernet data link layer. For this case, the device in which the Local L2 Agent resides must support the referenced RFC as an encapsulation protocol.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding document is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/.
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
The referenced RFC is an Informational RFC.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
The referenced RFC was approved by IESG and published.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
References within the referenced RFC are listed below.
RFC 1479
Steenstrup, M. "Inter-Domain Policy Routing Protocol Specification: Version 1", RFC1479, BBN Systems and Technologies, July 1993.
RFC 1226
Kantor, B. "Internet Protocol Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames", RFC 1226, University of California, San Diego, May 1991.
RFC 1234
Provan, D. "Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Networks", RFC 1234, Novell, Inc., June 1991.
RFC 1241
Woodburn, R., and D. Mills, "Scheme for an Internet Encapsulation Protocol: Version 1", RFC 1241, SAIC, University of Delaware, July 1991.
RFC 1326
Tsuchiya, P., "Mutual Encapsulation Considered Dangerous", RFC 1326, Bellcore, May 1992.
SDRP
Estrin, D., Li, T., and Y. Rekhter, "Source Demand Routing Protocol Specification (Version 1)", Work in Progress.
RFC 1702
Hanks, S., Li, T., Farinacci, D., and P. Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 networks", RFC 1702, NetSmiths, Ltd., cisco Systems, October 1994.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
None.
|
|
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):
|
|
|
None
|
|
