On March 3, 2021 at 2:47:38 PM, Les Ginsberg wrote: > > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
Les: Hi! ... > > (1) Is it wise to use normative keywords MUST and SHOULD in the > > appendix? The text is from section 3.1 but can it be reworded in the > > appendix? Also wondering if other changes (IANA, nits) could be listed > > or we could call it "major change" :) > > [Les:] I personally do not have an issue using the normative keywords in > the Appendix. Not doing so I think might trigger someone to ask if there is > some inconsistency between the Appendix text and the text in the body of the > draft. 😊 > > If you know of some prohibition against using such keywords in an Appendix > please provide the reference. There's no specific prohibition against it -- in fact, sometimes an appendix can be normative so it is completely appropriate to have normative language. In this case, the appendix is informative and the normative text is only reflecting what the main body of the draft says (which is where the specification is). To avoid confusion about which piece of text is normative, and keep consistency, I would recommend using quotes in the appendix: OLD> 1. The Router ID SHOULD be identical to the value advertised in the Traffic Engineering Router ID TLV (134) if available. NEW> 1. The "Router ID SHOULD be identical" to the value advertised in the Traffic Engineering Router ID TLV (134) if available (Section 3.1). Alvaro. _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
