The scope of RFC 2119 is clearly standards-track documents. Documents that aren't standards should not be worded as if they were; this is likely to cause confusion about the status of the document.
Sent from my iPhone On May 21, 2013, at 12:08 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote: > On May 21, 2013, at 8:56 AM, Keith Moore <mo...@network-heretics.com> wrote: > >> 2119 language is intended to describe requirements of standards-track >> documents. > > Can you support that statement with a reference to an RFC or an IESG > statement that supports it? > >> Informational documents cannot impose requirements. > > Same request. > > I don't find either statement supported by RFC 2119 or 2026, or any updates > to the latter, but I may have missed it. > > --Paul Hoffman
