> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott 
> Kitterman
> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 9:23 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-as-07.txt
> 
> I'm generally OK with this, but I think it should be MUST NOT vice
> SHOULD NOT.

I suggested SHOULD NOT because RFC2119 defines that as basically "MUST NOT, 
unless you've given serious thought to why you're ignoring that advice."

Does that sound any better?
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf

Reply via email to