The WGLC on this document is now closed and the outcome if positive. Authors, would you mind submitting a revised version addressing the comments of Darren Dukes (see below) so that we can submit this revision to the IESG queue.
-éric & -ron On 30/05/2018, 20:30, "OPSEC on behalf of Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <opsec-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of ddu...@cisco.com> wrote: Section 3.4.2.5 contradicts section 3.3 on handling of unknown RHT’s. Section 3.4.2.5 contradicts section 3.4.2.4 assessment of operational impact. It appears to me that 3.4.3.5 should state: Intermediate systems should discard packets containing a RHT0 or RHT1. Other routing header types should be permitted. _______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list OPSEC@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec