On Thu, 17 May 2007, John C Klensin wrote:
Is this construction dangerous if used in inappropriate
contexts? Sure. Does that justify a warning note to the
unwary? Probably. Is it possible to implement other things and
call them by the same name (i.e., create a non-conforming
implementation)? Of course. Should that invalidate the
definition? Not if we want to have anything left if the
principle were applied broadly.
+1
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
ROCKALL: SOUTHWEST 6 TO GALE 8, INCREASING SEVERE GALE 9, PERHAPS STORM 10
LATER. VERY ROUGH OR HIGH. SHOWERS. GOOD.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf