Alan DeKok <al...@deployingradius.com> wrote:
>> I suggest re-adding the subsection for PAC TLV with a brief note that
>> it's deprecated. This would serve as reminder that TLV number 11 did
>> exist and it would also keep the section numbering unchanged making it
>> easier to compare RFC 7170 and its updated version. This is a purely
>> an editorial idea.
> I'm not sure it's useful to document things which aren't used.
> But It's useful to compare section numbers. I'll add a paragraph
> explaining that it was removed, and why.
That's a good idea.
TLV number 11 was the PAC. It is documented in {{RFC7170}}, but is
considered deprecated.
In the IANA considerations, the other TLVs can be updated to "THIS DOCUMENT",
leaving 11 pointing at 7170.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
