|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Published standards-track RFC
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
The referenced document defines identifiers for use in MPLS-TP OAM PDUs. G.8113.2/Y-1372.2 formerly referenced a preliminary version of this document in its bibliography; with the publication of the RFC the reference should be made normative.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=6923
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
The document is published as a standards-track RFC.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
ISO3166-1 "Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions -- Part 1: Country codes", ISO3166-1, 2006./
/
Recommendation ITU-T M1400 "Designations for interconnections among operators', July 2006/
/
RFC2119 "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, March 1997./
/
RFC5003 "Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Types for Aggregation", RFC 5003, September 2007./
/
RFC6370 "MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Identifiers", RFC 6370, September 2011./
/
Recommendation ITU-T T.50 "International Reference Alphabet (IRA) (Formerly International Alphabet No. 5 or IA5) - Information technology - 7-bit coded character set for information exchange", ITU-T Recommendation T.50, September 1992./
/
Recommendation ITU-T Y.1731 "OAM functions and mechanisms for Ethernet based networks"
|
|
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
|
