On 20-05-2026 7:59 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> Linked to Andy's DISCUSS, whether this document is BCP or 'informational' is > also another question. Some BCP-like RFC (e.g., RFC 9099) are informational and > do not rely on BCP14, only plain English "should". I don't see Andy raising a question about the document status. EV> Andy didn't indeed, I was simply linking this point to the previous one
If the language is to all be SHOULDs or RECOMMENDED, that does raise the question about why the document isn't just an Informational instead of a BCP. In my opinion, the Internet is better served with the "enforcement" of a BCP, and hence why I am asking for many of the SHOULDs to be turned into MUSTs. -andy, ART AD _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
