On May 21, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The scope of RFC 2119 is clearly standards-track documents. I'll take that as a "no". The "scope" is mentioned exactly once, in the abstract but not in the body of the document. > Documents that aren't standards should not be worded as if they were; this is likely to cause confusion about the status of the document. I'm pretty sure that you as AD approved Informational RFCs that used 2119 language, and that this was discussed during your tenure on the IESG. The fact that there none of the updates to RFC 2026 even mention this suggests that there was not IETF consensus to the opinion. --Paul Hoffman