RE: IPv6 Address Option

["Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>]

Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com] writes:

> 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.

Speaking of which, perhaps you would like to address section 6 of RFC 2119.
Glad you've decided to do a little research once in a while, BTW ;-): you
have provided a treasure trove of material for RFC Errata.

> 
>   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/>