|
Umm, wait. I'm confused.
The boilerplate in existing documents points to 2119, right?
and the updated boilerplate would point to this spec, if approved, right? so
we're not retroactively changing the meaning of anything, right?
What am I missing?
Spencer
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 11:11
AM
Subject: Re: 2119bis
I could see maybe posting an erratum or a brief update to 2119, but I
think that reopening that document in general is a Very bad Idea. And
for existing documents that misuse SHOULD, the appropriate thing to do is to
update those documents or post errata to those documents, rather than try to
retroactively change the meaning of the keywords in those
documents.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing
list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
|
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf