|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 3526 (2003)
|
|
Title:
|
More Modular Exponential (MODP) Diffie-Hellman groups for Internet Key Exchange (IKE).
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Standard Track
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
A specification used by the Diffie-Hellman key agreement technique
|
|
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=2104
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
Proposed Standard
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
Proposed Standard
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
References within the referenced RFCs are listed under item (10).
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[RFC-2409] Harkins, D. and D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange (IKE)", RFC 2409, November 1998./
/
[RFC-2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998.
|
|
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):
|
|
|
Other: If the study group decides to make the reference to the RFC, the reference should always be made by RFC number (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References should not be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs.
|
