Why is the USGv6 profile distinct from the IETF Node Requirements summary, the DoD IPv6 profile, and the IPv6 Forum IPv6 Ready Logo program?
Prior to the development of the USGv6 profile and test program we surveyed all IPv6 standards, profiling and test programs that we were aware of. Certainly our initial goal was to adopt any existing program that we felt could serve the general needs of the USG acquisition and deployment plans that we were asked to support. As noted in the Executive Summary, clearly the proliferation of divergent profiling and standards efforts is something to be avoided in general. Having said that our initial survey of existing programs did not find an existing program well suited to the general USG IPv6 adoption plans we were asked to support. All profile and testing efforts are tailored to particular usage goals, scopes of applicability, user/constituent bases, time horizons, governance processes and specification techniques. Question 3 above addresses the first three issues with respect to the USGv6 profile. In terms of time horizons, the USGv6 profile is meant to be a strategic planning document t
Related Questions
- Why is the USGv6 profile distinct from the IETF Node Requirements summary, the DoD IPv6 profile, and the IPv6 Forum IPv6 Ready Logo program?
- Is there a forum for procuring and establishing links between local and national content requirements and development?
- Do the same requirements apply to DoD access to PCII?
