Esko Dijk wrote:
> The proposed text still needs some work here; I would urge the WG not
> to accept this in current form. That said, using normative language in
> this specific part certainly helps to clarify the requirements for
> implementers.
So, I agree, but "Hold for
Hi all,
The proposed text still needs some work here; I would urge the WG not to accept
this in current form. That said, using normative language in this specific
part certainly helps to clarify the requirements for implementers.
As a side question to all about IETF requirements language -
