Brian Haberman <[email protected]> wrote: > 2. RFC 7668 falls in the standards track, in my opinion, due to the > strict guidance provided in sectins 3.2.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.5. If those > rules are not followed, IPv6-over-BTLE won't work. Those types of > statements can be advanced along the standards track (PS -> IS). The > "advice" in minimal is far less declarative and appears to be advisory.
> As I said in Yokohama, I can see minimal being re-worded as a standards
> track document, but today it reads like a BCP or Informational
> document.
I believe that this is a bug in the text, not in the intention.
A kind of shyness :-)
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
