On 9/25/2014 8:52 AM, Fernando Gont wrote: > On 09/25/2014 12:38 PM, Joe Touch wrote: >> On 9/25/2014 7:58 AM, Fernando Gont wrote: >> ... >>> May I ask where does draft-gont-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering try to deprecate >>> anything? >> >> In every statement where an existing IPv6 required capability is changed. >> >> E.g.: >> - demotes requirements to "SHOULDS" (most x.x.x.5 sections). > > They are lowercase shoulds. And not protocol changes, but operational > advice.
I see no utility to a BCP that makes operational recommendations without qualifying them in RFC2119 language. Further, this doc does not explicitly indicate the distinction between upper and lowercase of the RFC2119 terms. IMO, except for use in discussion prose, those terms need to be avoided at all cost except where used in their RFC2119 sense. >> - deprecates the flags in HBH options intended to declare how an option >> is handled when not known by providing advice specific to each option >> type that does not consider the flag setting > > The advice in this I-D essentially mimics RFC7045 for options. That was > the intent. Am I missing something? The places where you provide contradictory advice, notably (from 7045): RFC 2460 requires destination hosts to discard packets containing unrecognised extension headers. However, intermediate forwarding nodes SHOULD NOT do this, since that might cause them to inadvertently discard traffic using a recently standardised extension header not yet recognised by the intermediate node. The exceptions to this rule are discussed next. Joe _______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
