yup Scott On Oct 29, 2013, at 4:48 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 2013-10-29 21:46, Bradner, Scott wrote: >> see rfc 2418 page 3 as well as RFC 2434 page 3 for an example of non-protocol uses of 2119 terms >> >> fwiw - I have seen 2119 terms used in registration type RFCs for rather many years >> I think it is too late to unwind that clock >> >> Scott >> >> Scott Bradner > > Well yes, I've seen that too. > > But there *is* confusion about whether it's the right approach, and it would be really cool if there was some consistency with respect to this. > > Best regards, Julian >