Thanks Yoav, I don't get a lot of citations for that one :-) From: Yoav Nir [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 01 August 2012 18:15 To: [email protected] Cc: Barry Leiba; Abdussalam Baryun; ietf Subject: Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt He meant "PILLAR OF SALT" On Aug 1, 2012, at 9:39 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Barry, Did you mean "bad" or "BAD"? A From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba Sent: 01 August 2012 17:04 To: Abdussalam Baryun Cc: ietf Subject: Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt I written this draft starting a RFC2119 update for the reasons of discussion threads in [1] and [2]. Please check draft and feedback, thanking you. I agree with what Paul and Melinda have said. This document is pointless, as there is no actual problem that it's solving and no misunderstanding that it's clarifying. Further, it's actively *harmful*. It's arguable that 2119 already reserves too many words by giving them specific, normative meanings (SHALL *and* MUST; SHOULD *and* RECOMMENDED). Adding IF, THEN, and ELSE would not only be unnecessary, but downright *bad*. Barry Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
