Fernando, I understand you do no think the PSP behavior of the network
programming draft is compliant with other IPv6 RFCs.
Please stop asserting that non-compliance as fact. The IESG (the body
the IETF has agreed rules on such things) determined that PSP did not
violate RFC 8200.
While I do not like PSP, I understand the reasoning they used, and
respect that it is their job to make such decisions.
Yours,
Joel
On 1/23/2021 7:54 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
On 23/1/21 14:12, Joe Touch wrote:
On Jan 22, 2021, at 11:37 PM, Fernando Gont <fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
One *internet-draft* certainly doesn't undermine E2E. However, I guess
that an *RFC* published as a "Proposed Standard" probably does
(undermine) E2E?
Not when it doesn’t update the hundreds of other standards that don’t.
It doesn't formally update them, true. But it is a de-facto update:
behavior that goes against such other standards has been approved as PS.
