Bob Braden wrote:
Martin Rex wrote:
what do you want to say with this?
That implementors should ignore at least half of the MUSTs and SHOULDs
in IETF documents, because they don't make any sense, create unnecessary
interop problems or are otherwise harmful -- and should not be in the
document in the first place?
All in all, that pretty much sums up the current (and long standing)
situation, IMHO.
In that case, it should be the task of the IETF process
(Document Shepard and responsible Area Director) to reduce the
amount of inappropriate uses of imperatives from rfc-2119.
I have never seen an IETF AD fight so passionately for the
addition of rfc-2119-violating and unreasonable imperatives into
a document such as Pasi is doing it now.
-Martin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf