Hi Alvaro,
We posted a new draft version to address most of your feedback.
(2) rfc2119 keywords
§2 (Key Concepts, Terminology, and Technological Landscape) says:
This document does not describe interoperability requirements. As
such, it does not use the capitalized keywords defined in [BCP14].
I agree with not using rfc2119 keywords when talking about the
considerations themselves. However, they should be used when
defining the
specific requirements for when the Operational Considerations
section is
needed (see above) to avoid confusion.
On this point above, we discussed it and we concluded that we don't want
to impose the RFC2119 keywords in the operational considerations section
See
https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis/issues/73
Conclusion from June 26th meeting:
no required to use RFC 2119, as long as the language is clear
(mainly section 3). For ex: the new section is mandatory
Note: IESG Statement on Clarifying the Use of BCP 14 Key Words
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-statement-on-clarifying-the-use-of-bcp-14-key-words/>
Regards, Benoit (on behalf of the authors)
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
