Thomas, On 2010-10-06 02:30, Thomas Narten wrote: > Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> writes: > . >>> (That is RFC 2460 that says "New flow labels must be chosen >>> (pseudo-)randomly and uniformly from the range 1 to FFFFF hex.") >>> > >> Yes, in the non-normative appendix! The only normative statement > > Where does the idea come from that this (or any) appendix is > non-normative? Appendices are non-normative only if the text > specifically says so. By default, they are just as normative as other > sections.
Correct, but... > > And, Section 6 of RFC 2460 (in the main body) says: > >> Appendix A describes the current intended semantics and usage of the >> Flow Label field. > > So, the intention seems pretty clear to me. However, just before that it says: >> This aspect of IPv6 is, at the time of >> writing, still experimental and subject to change as the requirements >> for flow support in the Internet become clearer. which surely can only mean that the text about "intended semantics" and the Appendix are not normative. Things would be better if RFC 3697 also stated Updates: 2460. Brian > > That doesn't mean the text hasn't been superceded my one of the follow > on Flow Label RFCs. But I don't think we can say the 2460 text is > non-nomrative. > > Thomas > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
