question in draft-ietf-ngtrans-harden-01.txt

[Bob Fink]

At 01:51 AM 8/31/99 +0900, =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCJU4lMCVBJTElJBsoQg==?= wrote:
>Hi bob,
>Thank you for quick reply.
>
>| It is meant to be vague so so to imply high reliability in any and all
>| meaningful areas. It is unlikely it would ever be really measured as we are
>| by and large self policing, but it tries to convey intent.
>
>I understand above.
>
>Is this RFC standard style to mention reliability?

Though this is to eventually be an RFC, it is an informational RFC, not a
standards track or experimental RFC, thus there aren't any hard and fast rules.


>How about exactly mentioning like above(imply high reliability)
>to avoid confusion?

Ok, I'll ask Rob Rockell as he is the author. 


Thanks,

Bob