IS-IS for IP Internets (isis)

headers Sumanta Seal | 12 Jun 2009 11:45

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

It is purely procedural. The old one was "informational", whereas the 
new one is "standards track". Since the IS-IS protocol is technically 
"owned" by ISO, any IETF work on IS-IS could only be informational. 
However, following an agreement with ISO, IP related IS-IS work can now 
become standards track. Hence the change of status, which required the 
issuance of a new RFC.

Similar changes have been made to other IS-IS RFCs.

    Mike

Sumanta Seal wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The new RFC 5306 obsoletes the existing one for ISIS GR (3847). But 
> this new RFC does not includes any update or modification or 
> correction over the existing one. I am wondering why this new RFC was 
> introduced obsoleting the old one. Can anybody please let me know the 
> reason behind it.
>
> Thanks,
> Sumanta
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter now! 
> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_cricket_1/*http://beta.cricket.yahoo.com>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> Isis-wg <at> ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
>   

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun

1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

3	May 2013
18	April 2013
17	March 2013
61	February 2013
2	January 2013
3	December 2012
7	November 2012
16	October 2012
20	September 2012
11	August 2012
5	July 2012
3	June 2012
1	May 2012
7	April 2012
26	March 2012
1	February 2012
3	January 2012
2	November 2011
17	October 2011
8	September 2011
8	August 2011
11	July 2011
7	June 2011
14	May 2011
46	April 2011
16	March 2011
31	February 2011
55	January 2011
38	December 2010
32	November 2010
22	October 2010
137	September 2010
52	August 2010
13	July 2010
24	June 2010
46	May 2010
62	April 2010
48	March 2010
4	February 2010
3	January 2010
7	December 2009
4	November 2009
1	October 2009
11	September 2009
3	August 2009
1	July 2009
3	June 2009
2	May 2009
69	April 2009
27	March 2009
14	February 2009
14	January 2009
2	December 2008
5	November 2008
21	October 2008
5	September 2008
15	August 2008
21	July 2008
14	June 2008
3	May 2008
26	April 2008
22	March 2008
18	February 2008
3	January 2008
4	December 2007
22	November 2007
18	October 2007
8	September 2007
7	August 2007
3	July 2007
20	June 2007
7	May 2007
17	April 2007
22	March 2007
19	February 2007
8	January 2007
12	December 2006
11	November 2006
9	October 2006
3	September 2006
7	August 2006
14	July 2006
16	June 2006
4	May 2006
19	April 2006
11	March 2006
13	February 2006
4	January 2006
34	December 2005
14	November 2005
37	October 2005
27	September 2005
3	August 2005
11	July 2005
14	June 2005
26	May 2005
11	April 2005
34	March 2005
42	February 2005
22	January 2005
17	December 2004
16	November 2004
62	October 2004
16	September 2004
38	August 2004
26	July 2004
48	June 2004
28	May 2004
27	April 2004
7	March 2004
21	February 2004
7	January 2004
4	December 2003
1	November 2003
13	October 2003
6	September 2003
7	August 2003
67	July 2003
98	June 2003
71	May 2003
56	April 2003
12	March 2003
54	February 2003
70	January 2003
7	December 2002
54	November 2002
136	October 2002
128	September 2002
69	August 2002
118	July 2002
75	June 2002
90	May 2002
137	April 2002

Re: RFC 5306 on Restart Signaling for IS-IS

Re: RFC 5306 on Restart Signaling for IS-IS

Re: RFC 5306 on Restart Signaling for IS-IS