Hi All, If we continue to reply on this thread we should probably remove Internet-Drafts and i-d-announce from the CC list -- no need to bother them with our traffic (and get bounce and moderator-approval-awaiting messages from them :-)).
Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: Phelan, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 10:15 AM > To: Eddie Kohler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [dccp] New draft :draft-ietf-dccp-serv-codes-01.txt > > Hi Eddie, > > One question on your comments: > > > 3 > > > > => "This section explicitly updates RFC 4340 as follows: > > > > "A DCCP implementation MUST allow multiple applications using > > different DCCP service codes to listen on the same server port. > > > > A DCCP implementation SHOULD provide a method that informs a > server > > of the Service Code value that was selected by an active > connection." > > " > > ==> I disagree with the first requirement, the MUST. That is too > harsh > > and I > > see no need for it. I like the second requirement. > > > [Tom P.] I couldn't track what Gorry and you agreed to on this in the > subsequent trail -- I assume you'd like that first requirement to be a > SHOULD instead of a MUST. I think that's OK but I'd object to making it > a MAY or removing it. > > Tom P.
