Re: Minimum Implementation Requirements (Was: 2119bis)

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

 



On 2011-09-02 07:45, Melinda Shore wrote:
...
> Can anybody point to an incident in which lack of clarity around
> 2119 language caused problems, and it was determined that 2119
> itself was the problem and not authors or editors being careless?

(or implementors being careless)

Indeed. I'm in favour of leaving "good enough" alone and not striving
for perfection, which is impossible anyway.

   Brian
_______________________________________________
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]