Hi Bruno, > [Bruno2] I agree that everyone should already want to interoperable. But the > unfortunate reality is that not everyone does. I believe that RC3107 is a > relatively well-known example: some implementors have deliberately not > implemented all (implicit) MUST at the cost of interop issues for network > operators. Some details > inhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8277#section-1 I have other more > recent examples but I’d rather avoid pointing to specific implementations.
So you’re admitting that ‘MUST’ doesn’t guarantee interoperability. So why fight about it? T
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
