Network Working Group A. Zinin
Request for Comments: 3563 Alcatel
Category: Informational July 2003
Network Working Group A. Zinin
Request for Comments: 3563 Alcatel
Category: Informational July 2003
Cooperative Agreement Between the ISOC/IETF and ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1/Sub Committee 6 (JTC1/SC6) on IS-IS Routing Protocol Development
ISOC/IETF和ISO/IEC联合技术委员会1/第6分委员会（JTC1/SC6）之间关于IS-IS路由协议开发的合作协议
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本备忘录为互联网社区提供信息。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2003年）。版权所有。
Abstract
摘要
This document contains the text of the agreement signed between ISOC/IETF and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 regarding cooperative development of the IS-IS routing protocol. The agreement includes definitions of the related work scopes for the two organizations, request for creation and maintenance of an IS-IS registry by IANA, as well as collaboration guidelines.
本文件包含ISOC/IETF和ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6之间就IS-IS路由协议的合作开发签署的协议文本。该协议包括两个组织相关工作范围的定义、IANA创建和维护IS-IS注册中心的请求以及协作指南。
Document Header
凭证抬头
Annexe 1 to Cooperative Agreement Between the Internet Society and
the International Organization for Standardization / International
Electrotechnical Commission / Joint Technical Committee 1 / Sub
Committee 6 (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6): IS-IS Routing Protocols
Annexe 1 to Cooperative Agreement Between the Internet Society and
the International Organization for Standardization / International
Electrotechnical Commission / Joint Technical Committee 1 / Sub
Committee 6 (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6): IS-IS Routing Protocols
Date: 2003-01-28
日期：2003-01-28
This annexe records the agreed collaborative process for the further development and standardisation of the Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) intra-domain routing protocol (ISO/IEC 10589).
本附录记录了进一步开发和标准化中间系统到中间系统（IS-IS）域内路由协议（ISO/IEC 10589）的商定协作过程。
The IS-IS intra-domain routing protocols, originally developed in ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6, have been successfully deployed in the Internet for several years.
IS-IS域内路由协议最初是在ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6中开发的，已经在Internet上成功部署了几年。
ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6 is the JTC1 sub-committee which has responsibility for maintenance of the IS-IS standard (ISO/IEC 10589).
ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6是JTC1小组委员会，负责维护is-is标准（ISO/IEC 10589）。
The IS-IS Working Group of the IETF is chartered to develop extensions to the IS-IS protocol to be used within the scope of the Internet.
IETF的IS-IS工作组被授权开发在互联网范围内使用的IS-IS协议的扩展。
This addendum documents the agreed process for the future development of IS-IS by both organizations.
本增编记录了两个组织未来发展IS-IS的商定过程。
Core IS-IS Mechanisms are subsystems with associated algorithms, data structures, and PDU formats as specified in (ISO/IEC 10589), constituting the core of the IS-IS protocol and including the following elements:
核心IS-IS机制是具有（ISO/IEC 10589）中规定的相关算法、数据结构和PDU格式的子系统，构成IS-IS协议的核心，包括以下要素：
a) Framework of PDU formats, including TLVs defined in [10589]
a) PDU格式框架，包括[10589]中定义的TLV
b) Encapsulation of PDUs
b) PDU的封装
c) Adjacency state machine and formation logic
c) 邻接状态机与形成逻辑
d) DIS election algorithm
d) 淘汰算法
e) Initial LSP synchronization via CSNP exchange
e) 通过CSNP交换的初始LSP同步
f) Asynchronous LSP flooding (including DIS flooding behavior)
f) 异步LSP泛洪（包括解除泛洪行为）
g) LSP database maintenance including LSP origination, aging, and purging
g) LSP数据库维护，包括LSP发起、老化和清除
h) Topology abstraction defined in [10589]
h) [10589]中定义的拓扑抽象
2.2 Internet-specific IS-IS Extensions:
2.2 特定于Internet的IS-IS扩展：
Internet-specific IS-IS Extensions are extensions to the IS-IS protocol that are within the work scope of the IETF including any routing or packet forwarding technology that the IETF decides to work on in the future (such as IPv4 or IPv6 unicast and multicast routing, MPLS, MPLS Traffic Engineering, or Generalized MPLS), and:
互联网特定IS-IS扩展是IETF工作范围内IS-IS协议的扩展，包括IETF决定在未来工作的任何路由或数据包转发技术（如IPv4或IPv6单播和多播路由、MPLS、MPLS流量工程或通用MPLS），以及：
a) do not modify the Core IS-IS Mechanisms and do not change operation of non-IP or affect compatibility with non-IP and dual implementations of IS-IS, or
a) 不要修改核心IS-IS机制，不要更改非IP的操作或影响与非IP和IS-IS的双重实现的兼容性，或
b) add supplementary mechanisms to the Core IS-IS Mechanisms, are not generally applicable to non-IP implementations of IS-IS, and do not change operation of non-IP or affect compatibility with non-IP and dual implementations of IS-IS, or
b) 向核心IS-IS机制添加补充机制，这些机制通常不适用于IS-IS的非IP实现，并且不会更改非IP的操作或影响与IS-IS的非IP和双重实现的兼容性，或者
c) are de facto implementation agreements that are not generally applicable to non-IP implementations of IS-IS.
c) 是事实上的实施协议，通常不适用于IS-IS的非IP实施。
Note that the introduction of new TLVs or sub-TLVs that do not modify the algorithms of the Core Mechanisms in a way that would affect interoperability with non-IP or dual implementations of IS-IS is not considered to be a modification to the Core IS-IS Mechanisms.
请注意，引入新的TLV或子TLV不会以影响与IS-IS的非IP或双重实现的互操作性的方式修改核心机制的算法，这并不视为对核心IS-IS机制的修改。
The following conventions are used in the rest of this document.
本文件其余部分使用以下约定。
SHALL This term is used to indicate commitment to follow a specific element of this agreement.
该术语用于表示遵守本协议特定内容的承诺。
MUST Equivalent to "SHALL"
必须等同于“应”
SHALL NOT This phrase is used to indicate commitment to NOT perform a specific action
“不得”这一短语用于表示不执行特定行动的承诺
MAY This term is used to indicate the right to perform a specific action
可以用这个词来表示执行特定行动的权利吗
SHOULD This term is used to indicate that following a specific element of this agreement is encouraged, however there may exist circumstances in which a decision may be made not to do so.
如果该术语用于表示鼓励遵循本协议的特定要素，但可能存在不这样做的情况。
JTC1 SHALL NOT and IETF MAY (subject to the IETF standards process) standardize any Internet-specific IS-IS Extensions.
JTC1不得且IETF可（根据IETF标准流程）标准化任何互联网特定IS-IS扩展。
Any IS-IS Extensions produced within the IETF that require standardization, but cannot be identified as Internet-specific per section 2.2 of this document SHOULD be submitted for standardization to JTC1 (see section 3.3.2). IETF SHALL NOT publish documents describing such IS-IS extensions other than as Informational RFCs.
IETF内产生的任何IS-IS扩展需要标准化，但不能根据本文件第2.2节确定为特定于互联网的，应提交JTC1进行标准化（见第3.3.2节）。IETF不得发布描述此类IS-IS扩展的文件，信息RFC除外。
IS-IS extensions submitted from the IETF to JTC1 will be processed under the JTC1 fast track procedure. To ensure the quality of such submissions, IETF SHALL apply to them the procedures for Proposed Standard submission according to [RFC2026] (even though these documents will not be published as standards-track IETF RFCs).
IETF向JTC1提交的IS-IS扩展将按照JTC1快速跟踪程序进行处理。为确保此类提交的质量，IETF应根据[RFC2026]对其应用拟议标准提交程序（即使这些文件不会作为标准跟踪IETF RFC发布）。
In the situations where it is not clear from the provisions of this document whether a specific protocol extension should be standardized within the IETF or within JTC1, the decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis and will be based on the agreement between the two organizations reached via a discussion between the IETF Routing Area Directors or the IETF liaison to JTC1/SC6 (who will reflect the IETF consensus on the matter), and the JTC1/SC6 secretariat.
在本文件规定不明确特定协议扩展是否应在IETF或JTC1中标准化的情况下，这些决定将在个案基础上作出，并将基于两个组织之间通过IETF路由区域主任或IETF与JTC1/SC6联络人（将反映IETF对此事的共识）和JTC1/SC6秘书处之间的讨论达成的协议。
All IS-IS-related IETF documents intended to be published as IETF standards track RFCs MUST include a section explaining why they qualify to be considered as Internet-specific IS-IS Extensions described in section 2.2 of this document.
所有打算作为IETF标准跟踪RFC发布的与IS相关的IETF文件必须包括一节，解释为什么它们有资格被视为本文件第2.2节所述的互联网特定IS-IS扩展。
Until JTC1 provides the registry service for IS-IS, IANA is requested to temporarily maintain such a registry as described below. Upon notification from JTC1, the registry management authority (i.e., value allocation) will be transferred to JTC1. IANA MAY still retain the registry for informational purposes and keep updating it based on information provided by JTC1.
在JTC1为IS-IS提供注册表服务之前，IANA被要求临时维护此类注册表，如下所述。一旦JTC1发出通知，注册管理权限（即价值分配）将转移至JTC1。IANA仍可以保留该注册表以供参考，并根据JTC1提供的信息不断更新。
IANA has created and currently maintains a registry for IS-IS TLV codepoints. The range of values is 0-255. Initial state of the registry should be synchronized with [RFC3359]. Allocation of values in the registry has to be approved by the designated expert assigned by the IESG. IETF SHALL keep JTC1/SC6 informed of TLV codepoint values allocated, and JTC1/SC6 SHALL refer allocation requests arising within JTC1 constituencies to the IANA registry process.
IANA已经为IS-IS TLV代码点创建并维护了一个注册表。值的范围为0-255。注册表的初始状态应与[RFC3359]同步。注册表中的值分配必须由IESG指定的专家批准。IETF应将分配的TLV码点值告知JTC1/SC6，JTC1/SC6应将JTC1选区内产生的分配请求提交给IANA注册过程。
IETF MAY request IANA to maintain IS-IS-related registries if those are required to maintain name spaces internal to Internet-specific IS-IS extensions.
IETF可以要求IANA维护IS相关的注册，如果需要这些注册来维护互联网特定IS-IS扩展内部的名称空间。
IETF SHALL inform the chairman and secretariat of ISO JTC 1/SC 6 about new IS-IS-related work items.
IETF应向ISO JTC 1/SC 6主席和秘书处通报新的IS相关工作项目。
JTC1/SC6 SHALL inform the IETF Routing Area directors and ISIS WG chairs about new IS-IS-related work items. Communication MAY be enacted directly using electronic mail, or may be conducted via appointed SC6 / IETF liaison representatives.
JTC1/SC6应通知IETF路由区域总监和ISIS工作组主席新的IS相关工作项目。通信可以直接使用电子邮件进行，也可以通过指定的SC6/IETF联络代表进行。
As a class A liaison organisation to JTC1, the Internet Society may submit existing standards for adoption as International Standards of the ISO, using the Fast-Track procedure.
作为JTC1的a级联络组织，互联网协会可使用快速通道程序，将现有标准作为ISO的国际标准提交采用。
IS-IS extensions developed by IETF and intended for standardization in JTC1 according to section 3.1 SHOULD therefore be submitted by one of the IETF ISIS WG chairs, or an IETF Routing Area director, sending an email message to the secretariat of ISO JTC 1 specifying the number of the Informational RFC containing the specification (the document MUST have been published as an RFC at the time of submission) and requesting fast-track processing by JTC1. The full text of the specification is then available using the following URL:
因此，IETF ISIS工作组主席之一或IETF路由区域主任应向ISO JTC 1秘书处发送电子邮件，说明包含规范的信息RFC的编号，以提交由IETF开发并根据第3.1节在JTC1中进行标准化的IS-IS扩展（提交时文件必须以RFC的形式发布）并请求JTC1进行快速处理。然后可使用以下URL获取规范全文：
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfcNNNN.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfcNNNN.txt
where "NNNN" is the number of the RFC being submitted. The IETF SHOULD also recommend that JTC1 assign the document to JTC1/SC6, and SHOULD also submit to JTC1 the name of an individual who is prepared to serve as project editor for the fast-track document.
其中“NNNN”是提交的RFC编号。IETF还应建议JTC1将文件分配给JTC1/SC6，并向JTC1提交准备担任快速通道文件项目编辑的个人姓名。
It is possible to make JTC1 standards specifications available for informational purposes of the IETF community by submitting the text of the specification as an Internet Draft and requesting the RFC Editor to publish the document as an Informational RFC. See sections 4.2.2 and 7 of [RFC2026] for more information. Guidelines for Internet Draft preparation are given in [ID-GUIDE].
通过将JTC1标准规范的文本作为互联网草案提交，并请求RFC编辑器将文件作为信息RFC发布，可以使JTC1标准规范可供IETF社区参考。更多信息，请参见[RFC2026]第4.2.2节和第7节。[ID-GUIDE]中给出了互联网草案编制指南。
Members of ISO JTC 1/SC 6 are welcome to review any IS-IS-related IETF document (all IETF documents are publicly available at the IETF web site) and submit their comments to the ISIS WG (by sending an
欢迎ISO JTC 1/SC 6成员审查任何与IS相关的IETF文件（所有IETF文件均可在IETF网站上公开获取），并向ISIS工作组提交意见（通过发送
email to the working group mailing list), the ISIS WG chairs (see [ISISWG] for more information), the IETF Routing Area directors, or the IESG (iesg@ietf.org).
电子邮件发送至工作组邮件列表）、ISIS工作组主席（更多信息请参见[ISISWG]）、IETF路由区域总监或IESG(iesg@ietf.org).
JTC1 is encouraged to request an IETF review of IS-IS-related work performed by JTC 1/SC 6 by submitting the text of the document as an informational Internet Draft (see section 3.3.2) and sending a message to the IETF ISIS WG mailing list requesting the comments.
鼓励JTC1请求IETF对JTC 1/SC 6执行的is相关工作进行审查，方法是将文件文本作为信息性互联网草案提交（见第3.3.2节），并向IETF ISIS工作组邮件列表发送一条消息，征求意见。
The IETF MAY request JTC1 to circulate provided comments among the National Bodies and Liaison Organizations involved in the discussion of the work under review.
IETF可要求JTC1在参与审查工作讨论的国家机构和联络组织之间分发提供的意见。
[10589] ISO, "Intermediate system to Intermediate system routing information exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the Protocol for providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", ISO/IEC 10589:1992.
[10589]ISO，“与提供无连接模式网络服务的协议一起使用的中间系统到中间系统路由信息交换协议（ISO 8473）”，ISO/IEC 10589:1992。
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC2026]Bradner，S.，“互联网标准过程——第3版”，BCP 9，RFC 2026，1996年10月。
[RFC3359] Przygienda, T., "Reserved Type, Length and Value (TLV) Codepoints in Intermediate System to Intermediate System", RFC 3359, August 2002.
[RFC3359]Przygienda，T，“中间系统到中间系统中的保留类型、长度和值（TLV）码点”，RFC 3359，2002年8月。
[ISISWG] "IS-IS for IP Internets (isis), IETF WG charter",
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/isis-charter.html
[ISISWG] "IS-IS for IP Internets (isis), IETF WG charter",
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/isis-charter.html
[ISO] "ISO Technical Committee details web-page",
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/stdsdevelopment/tc/tclist/
TechnicalCommitteeDetailPage.
TechnicalCommitteeDetail?COMMID=1
[ISO] "ISO Technical Committee details web-page",
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/stdsdevelopment/tc/tclist/
TechnicalCommitteeDetailPage.
TechnicalCommitteeDetail?COMMID=1
[JTC1] "ISO/IEC JTC1 web-page" http://www.jtc1.org
[JTC1] "ISO/IEC JTC1 web-page" http://www.jtc1.org
[SC6] "ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 web-page" http://www.jtc1sc06.org
[SC6] "ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 web-page" http://www.jtc1sc06.org
[IETF-ML] "IETF Mailing Lists web-page",
http://www.ietf.org/maillist.html
[IETF-ML] "IETF Mailing Lists web-page",
http://www.ietf.org/maillist.html
[ID-GUIDE] "Guidelines to Authors of Internet-Drafts",
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt
[ID-GUIDE] "Guidelines to Authors of Internet-Drafts",
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt
Approved, Approved,
批准,批准,，
for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 for the Internet Society
适用于互联网协会的ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6
Original signed by Original signed by
原件签字人原件签字人
Jack Houldsworth Harald Alvestrand
杰克·霍尔德斯沃思·哈拉尔·阿尔维斯特兰德
Date: March 3, 2003 Date: March 19, 2003
日期：2003年3月3日日期：2003年3月19日
This type of non-protocol document does not directly affect the security of the Internet.
这种类型的非协议文档不会直接影响Internet的安全性。
Alex Zinin Alcatel
亚历克斯·齐宁·阿尔卡特
EMail: zinin@psg.com
EMail: zinin@psg.com
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2003年）。版权所有。
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.
本文件及其译本可复制并提供给他人，对其进行评论或解释或协助其实施的衍生作品可全部或部分编制、复制、出版和分发，不受任何限制，前提是上述版权声明和本段包含在所有此类副本和衍生作品中。但是，不得以任何方式修改本文件本身，例如删除版权通知或对互联网协会或其他互联网组织的引用，除非出于制定互联网标准的需要，在这种情况下，必须遵循互联网标准过程中定义的版权程序，或根据需要将其翻译成英语以外的其他语言。
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
上述授予的有限许可是永久性的，互联网协会或其继承人或受让人不会撤销。
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
本文件和其中包含的信息是按“原样”提供的，互联网协会和互联网工程任务组否认所有明示或暗示的保证，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。
Acknowledgement
确认
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.
RFC编辑功能的资金目前由互联网协会提供。