[ipv6-wg] next version of RIPE-501, v.2

On 7/24/11 12:32 PM, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:
> If the equipment doesn't support IS-IS, then you can't expect it to
> support IS-IS MT ;)

;)

>
> Anyway, making IS-IS mandatory makes absolutely no sense; it's rarely
> used in Enterprise environments.
>
> What we could do is to change the current requirement into "If the
> equipment supports IS-IS routing protocol, it MUST support IS-IS MT
> ..." (don’t cut/paste, use the wording from the document ;)

hmm... I think we should not say "If equipment supports", as *we* are 
writing document defining what equipment must and should support. ;)

Probably it would be a good thing to say something like:

"If IS-IS [RFC5308] is requested, then IS-IS MT must be supported"

or maybe we just move from optional to mandatory this section:

"When IS-IS routing protocol is requested, the equipment SHOULD support 
"M-ISIS: Multi-Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to 
Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)" [RFC 5120] (highly recommended)"

...change the first word "When" to "If" and remove "(highly recommended)" :)

What do you guys think?

/jan