Bob Braden wrote: > > Martin Rex wrote: > > > > what do you want to say with this? > > That implementors should ignore at least half of the MUSTs and SHOULDs > > in IETF documents, because they don't make any sense, create unnecessary > > interop problems or are otherwise harmful -- and should not be in the > > document in the first place? > > All in all, that pretty much sums up the current (and long standing) > situation, IMHO.
In that case, it should be the task of the IETF process (Document Shepard and responsible Area Director) to reduce the amount of inappropriate uses of imperatives from rfc-2119. I have never seen an IETF AD fight so passionately for the addition of rfc-2119-violating and unreasonable imperatives into a document such as Pasi is doing it now. -Martin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
