On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 17:00 -0500, Kim Kinnear wrote: > > This says "MAY" leave open. That's not the complement to SHOULD close. > > We don't really care if you keep it open or not. Really. > If you think that you will be happier, keep it open. If > you think it is simpler to close it (as I do), then close > it. Different people (different authors even!) have different > ideas about how they would structure the code for this. That's > ok. The point about all of this open/closed/multiple-operations > stuff it to leave it up to the implementor. Period. We are > not trying to tell them exactly how to implement this. We > are trying to focus on the protocol aspects, and leave understood.
That's not what SHOULD means. An RFC2119 SHOULD is very strong; if the spec doesn't care what an implementation does, don't use SHOULD. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
