On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 11:54 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
> [Med] That wording was on purpose. We could easily turn that text into the > following: > > NEW: > If the definition of a cost mode does not indicate whether it > applies to a subset of cost metrics, ALTO implementations > MUST be prepared to accept that cost mode for any cost metric. > > ... but there is a high risk that this behavior will overlooked and thus > the default mode will be the rule. This would have interoperability > implications as it is likely that some modes can't be associated with all > cost metrics. > > The SHOULD is some sort of authors guideline to assess the applicability > and record it. > Hi Mohamed, Understood. I suggest using "should" rather than "SHOULD", and then saying something like what you just said here to underscore why it's important for future documents to go into this. -MSK
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
