[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-reqts-05.txt
- To: iesg <iesg@ietf.org>
- Subject: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-reqts-05.txt
- From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 04:23:08 +0200
should this not be stds track, maybe bcp, as it uses 2119 language,
and i think we would like to give it weight?
---
and i don't think NOT should be used in
For example, requiring that a protocol support confidentiality
is NOT the same thing as requiring that all protocol traffic be
encrypted.
---
and
A protocol submission is not compliant if it fails to satisfy
one or more of the MUST or MUST NOT requirements for the
capabilities that it implements. A protocol submission that
satisfies all the MUST, MUST NOT, SHOULD and SHOULD NOT
requirements for its capabilities is said to be
"unconditionally compliant"; one that satisfies all the MUST
and MUST NOT requirements but not all the SHOULD or SHOULD NOT
requirements for its protocols is said to be "conditionally
compliant."
use of 2119 is abstracted an amusing level. but i don't think it
can be improved.
---
great document. but some oxen are being gored, and they're gonna
be upset. not a problem to me.
randy