| or maybe just file an erratum. I think it's fairly obvious that any document that actually uses NOT RECOMMENDED should define what it means, if it expects those words to have any meaning other than the ordinary English meaning of those words (with or without capitalization). I've seen documents that didn't quote the 2119 boilerplate verbatim because they didn't use all of the terms defined in 2119. I didn't see any problem with that. On Aug 31, 2011, at 11:48 AM, Jari Arkko wrote: In any case, Peter, I think its fine to add the NOT RECOMMENDED word to the boilerplate. Publish a spec on that, have it Update 2119, and then new RFCs would refer to that (say, 7119) instead of 2119 and everyone would be happy. |
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf