Re: DOD-STD-2167a

[helliott@losat.redstone.army.mil (Doc Elliott)]

In article <49686@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL>, sws@mercury.nswses.navy.mil 
says...
>
>In article <BQ8ZKAn.verneh@delphi.com>, Howard Verne <verneh@delphi.com> 
wrote:
>>I received a "released" copy of MIL-STD-498 in the mail today.
>>It is my understanding that it was approved for approx. 2 years
>>until the IEEE/EIA commercial version is released.
>> 
>>verne@pc.gcs.litton.com
>
>FWIW, we recently received direction (believe from Sec Nav) that there
>was no commercial equivalent standard to 2167A that would produce
>software with the requried reliability.  Therefore, 2167A (and I suppose
>498) are approved for specifying in mission critical software contracts.
>
>s smart

Please, Please, Please post or email me the text of the "direction" you 
received regarding this.  I need to know who wrote the direction, when, 
and to whom it was directed.  We were told verbally, in the Army 
Acquisition Streamlining RoadShow, yesterday, by Mr. Gilbert Decker, 
Asst Sec of Army for RDA, that there would be no use of 2167A or 498 in 
procurement documents by the military.  It would sure be nice to a) prove 
him wrong; b) show that other branches of the military are not throwing 
the entire bathroom out with the baby and the bathwater.


Doc Elliott
KE4KUZ
Internet: helliott@losat.redstone.army.mil
packet: ke4kuz@k4ry.#cenal.al.usa.noam
The opinions expressed herein are mine, and do not
reflect those of my employer or anyone else unless
specifically stated as such.