> -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Narten > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 11:02 AM > To: Russ Housley > Cc: IETF; iesg@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Errata against RFC 5226 rejected > > I don't see the need for this. "should" seems good enough for me. Also, > the wording "any ranges that are ... etc." implies to me that the list > provided are examples and if a category doesn't apply, you don't > include it. > > In other words, I don't see a problem with the existing text that > warrants bothering with an errata. > > But maybe I'm missing what the problem is. +1. -MSK _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf