Brian, > Brian E Carpenter wrote: > RFC 3056 says: > [SNIP] > Now, which word in "MUST NOT" is hard to understand?
I think you give way too much importance to what a MUST NOT in an RFC can achieve. - As seen with the Elz appeal recently, the IETF is not interesting in forcing users to configure their networks in the IETF way. - Even if there was some sanity check code, I work for a few organizations that would easily twist their vendor's arm in order to provide a special flag to bypass the check. - Not to mention that some people won't find difficult to pad the check with NOPs. Michel. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
