RE: 2119bis

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric Burger
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 12:37 AM
> To: hector
> Cc: IETF discussion list
> Subject: Re: 2119bis
> 
> I would offer this highlights the problem with today's SHOULD.  Some
> think SHOULD means something is OK to implement, but life does not end
> if you do not do it. Others think SHOULD means something HAS to be
> implemented, unless the environment indicates the protocol will not
> work in some corner case.

On the other hand, given the current SHOULD definition in RFC2119, I'm at a loss to understand how one could reasonably come to other than the second interpretation you give here.  It's fairly explicit to me.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]