Pulling out this particular question to see if others have an opinion on
this.
Should we change 6087bis to reduce it reliance on RFC 2119 language?
The reasoning for proposing this change is to avoid accidentally
creating future CLRs, because tool implementations might regard the RFC
2119 language in 6087bis as defining rules rather than just offering
guidance.
An example change:
Before:
Prefix values SHOULD be short, but also likely to be unique. Prefix
values SHOULD NOT conflict with known modules that have been
previously published.
After:
Prefix values should be short, but also likely to be unique. Prefix
values SHOULD NOT conflict with known modules that have been
previously published.
Thanks,
Rob
On 08/09/2017 15:23, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
Robert Wilton píše v Pá 08. 09. 2017 v 14:41 +0100:
It might be better if a lot of the guidance in 6087bis is changed to avoid
using RFC 2119 language precisely so that it can't be subsequently interpreted
as a formal rule.
I very much agree with this, the use of 2119 keywords sometimes makes things
confusing.
Lada
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
