I wonder if the mix of SHOULD and should is intentional. And I cannot recall seeing RFC2119 as an Informative Reference before.
s.1 / entierly/ entirely/ And I am surprised at the lack of mention of IPv6 which did its bit for the planet by eliminating broadcast. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Juan Carlos Zuniga" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 9:09 PM > Dear Int-Area WG, > > A review of draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider has been published. Since > there was good support for this document from the beginning and the new > version addresses the pending comments, we believe it is ready for WG Last > Call. > > This email starts an Int-Area WG Last Call on: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-02 > > Please respond to this email to support the document and/or send comments > by 2017-03-20. > > In addition, to satisfy RFC 6702 "Promoting Compliance with Intellectual > Property Rights (IPR)": > Are you personally aware of any IPR that applies to > draft-ietf-intarea-hostname-practice? > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules? > (See RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669, and 5378 for more details.) > > Best, > > Juan Carlos Zuniga & Wassim Haddad > (Int-Area WG co-chairs) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
