On 08/02/2015 13:55, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2015, at 7:00 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>> However, I don't think you should remove this sentence and the normative 
>> reference
>> to RFC 7045:
>>
>>   [RFC7045] requires that nodes be
>>   configurable with respect to whether packets with unrecognized
>>   headers are forwarded, and allows the default behavior to be
>>   that such packets be dropped.
> 
> What does that have to do with DHCPv6 shield?   I guess I don't mind if this 
> is included, but it seems unnecessary.

DHCPv6 Shield matches the definition of "forwarding node" given
in RFC 7045, so reminding implementers of the requirement seems
appropriate to me.

   Brian

_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

Reply via email to