Re: issue 34 proposal

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   > I would note that the return routability text is already 
   > being performed based on policy (as agreed upon in earlier 
   > issues). So it isn't clear to me that we need to have an answer here.
   
   I think I missed this part of the discussion,

=> to summary for the explicit update (Mobike one) the default policy
is to perform a RR check (equivalent of a SHOULD but clearer about
the cases the RR check is not needed). There was always a consensus,
the discussion was about the wording (clearer, simpler and more accurate).

   but it seems like an
   appropriate thing to do.  However, if a known attack is possible, we
   might want to add this as a SHOULD or at least document it as a security
   consideration.
   
=> as Jari explained this is already in the document.

Regards

[email protected]