On 2011-08-31 10:38, ned+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> On Aug 30, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>
>>> I support adding the SHOULD ... UNLESS formalism (although maybe it should be MUST... UNLESS). It would be useful as there will be times where the UNLESS can be specified and has been given due consideration at the time of writing. That, however, will not always be the case. (More inline).
>
>> How would SHOULD...UNLESS or MUST...UNLESS differ from using the current 2119 definitions and just writing SHOULD...unless or MUST ... unless?
>
>> Personally I think 2119 is just fine and doesn't need to be updated.
>
> +1. I'm still not seeing sufficient justification to open this particular can
> of worms at this juncture.
+ another 1.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf