I think the current text looks appropriate.
I'll leave the AD and others to comment on whether they think we should
make this an RFC 2119 recommendation.
Gorry
On 17/02/2010 19:07, Fernando Gont wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:gorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I looked at the new text in rev -06 looks like it may be appropriate.
Sorry... does the current text look okay?
I note that you used "should not" rather than "SHOULD NOT" - was
that intentional, and if so, why.
I guess I just added a clarification for DCCP but didn't mean to add a
"new" req. In retrospective, one my argue that I should s/should
not/SHOULD NOT/ both for DCCP and for TCP (and probably for SCTP, too).
Thoughts? Comments?
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx> ||
fgont@xxxxxxx <mailto:fgont@xxxxxxx>
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
