Re: still need review of normative vs. non-normative reference split.

To: "Brent McClure" <mcclure%swcp.com@localhost>
Subject: Re: still need review of normative vs. non-normative reference split.
From: RJ Atkinson <rja%extremenetworks.com@localhost>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:12:46 -0500

On Thursday, Jan 16, 2003, at 17:09 America/Montreal, Brent McClurewrote:

Agree. With some possible exceptions:

I wonder if RFC-1750 (Randomness recommendations for security)
might be listed as informative.


It is normative.  An implementation that doesn't follow those
recommendations can't be secure.

Also, it seems like RFC2434 (IANA considerations in RFCS) seems
like it could be listed as informative rather than normative.


No.  It is normative because we are obliged to follow that RFC
in our IANA considerations.

Ran

References:
- Re: still need review of normative vs. non-normative reference split.
  - From: Brent McClure

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index