John C Klensin wrote:
Translation: this seems like an interesting idea, but the
concepts are, IMO, probably much better expressed in nuanced
text rather than in cute codes. A different version of the
same thinking would suggest that any document needing these
extended keywords is not ready for standardization and should be
published as Experimental and left there until the community
makes up its collective mind.
I find Paul's definitions quite useful for cases like migration from
older ciphers/hash functions to new ones.
USEFOR WG also had at least one use case for SHOULD+.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf