[dev] RFC compliance

Jeff Tantsura jefftant at gmail.com
Tue Aug 14 13:40:25 EDT 2018


Donald,

I’m in no way suggesting what you should do, merely explaining meaning of what has been asked.

It is however a good practice to document level of compliance to a standard at the time feature is being delivered, it is pain in the $$ to go thru code afterwords, trying to figure out, what has actually been implemented :-) 

Cheers,
Jeff

> On Aug 14, 2018, at 09:14, Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> 
> Jeff -
> 
> We are not a vendor selling support.  If a vendor selling support
> wants to provide the legwork for a RFQ/RFI then they can.  I see this
> as part of the value add here that they provide.  You have to remember
> that for many years the documentation we had was in shambles, only in
> the last year have we put some serious effort into fixing it up.
> Quite frankly we still have a non-trivial amount of work here for a
> group of people who traditionally are not any good at this type of
> work( document writing ).  If you or Mike(or anyone for that matter )
> would like to spend time helping us in this regards how can I help
> make this happen?
> 
> donald
> 
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 11:53 AM, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Donald
>> 
>> In telco world pretty much mandatory... an RFQ/RFI would always have this
>> section, and depending on the services also MEF compliance
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 05:11 Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Jeff -
>>> 
>>> The documentation lists a bunch of supported RFC's
>>> http://docs.frrouting.org/en/latest/overview.html#system-architecture
>>> . But we really have not made a concerted effort to keep this list up
>>> to date at all.  If someone were to spend time doing this and updating
>>> the documentation we would be greatly appreciative.
>>> 
>>> Additionally on the frrouting.org website we have ANVL results of
>>> testing against the main protocols people are using.
>>> 
>>> donald
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Compliant to RFC XYZ
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 13, 2018, at 12:33, Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mike -
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you explain what you mean by `compliance statement`?
>>>>> 
>>>>> donald
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Mike Mezeul <MMezeul at advaoptical.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello;
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am new to Free Range Routing and I am trying to find a compliance
>>>>>> statement so that I can compare the FRR stack with the stack that we
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> currently using but I can’t seem to find anything on this topic.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Can anyone out there point me to such a list?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks, Mike Mezeul
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Michael J. Mezeul
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Senior Director R&D
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ADVA Optical Networking Inc., NA
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2301 North Greenville Avenue, Suite 300
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richardson, Texas 75082
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> T: +1 972.759.1216
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> F: +1 972.759.1201
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> M: +1 214.448.9239
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> mmezeul at advaoptical.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> www.advaoptical.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> dev mailing list
>>>>>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>>>>>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> dev mailing list
>>>>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>>>>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>>> 




More information about the dev mailing list