Re: [Nea] Last Call: <draft-ietf-nea-pt-eap-06.txt> (PT-EAP: Posture Transport (PT) Protocol For EAP Tunnel Methods) to Proposed Standard

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Stephen,
At 14:17 14-01-2013, Stephen Hanna wrote:
>Changing our reference to RFC 5209 to be normative may cause
>more problems than it solves. As RFC 3967 (BCP 97) says,

Yes.

 From Section 1.1:

   "The reader is assumed to be thoroughly familiar with that
    document." (RFC 5209)

> > IETF procedures generally require that a standards track RFC
> > may not have a normative reference to another standards track
> > document at a lower maturity level or to a non standards track
> > specification (other than specifications from other standards
> > bodies). For example, a standards track document may not have
> > a normative reference to an informational RFC.

It's a matter of mentioning the down-ref in the Last Call announcement.

>If I've missed something (e.g. a reason why the reference should
>be normative), please explain it more clearly.

See above.  I flagged it as the matter may be raised as an issue.  I 
am ok with whatever the WG decides.

Regards,
-sm