Re: IPv6 Address Option

[Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>]

Glen Zorn wrote:
> Bernard Aboba [mailto:bernard_aboba@hotmail.com] writes:
> Somebody should note (might as well be me) that since the 1) the
> document is not a protocol specification & 2) the intended status is
> BCP, the use of RFC 2118 keywords is inappropriate to begin with.

  Here's a list of RFCs that:

    (a) are Status: BCP
    (b) have the word "guidelines" in their title
    (c) use RFC 2119 keywords
    (d) are relatively recent

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3470

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3552

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4107

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4181

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5405

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5625

  That's 8 documents in about 5 minutes of work.  I think your claim has
been proven false.  The design guidelines document is following the
current practice of the IETF.  The only way to disprove this is outright
denial.

  Alan DeKok.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>