On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 06:12:39PM +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-26 17:14, Stewart Bryant wrote: > > I diligently included in a draft the updated "RFC2119" boilerplate > > which includes the reference to RFC8174. > > > > Nits then complains that it does not like the RFC2119 text (which is cut > > and paste from a very recent RFC). > > > > So which is right, nits or the RFC Editor? > > ... > > Seems that idnits needs an update. Seems that it does, indeed. And perhaps Stewart should look at the Errata for RFC 2119, if he has not already. -Ben