-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Mark Nottingham
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 5:08 PM
To: Peter Saint-Andre
Cc: IETF discussion list
Subject: Re: 2119bis
Thanks for starting this, Peter. A few comments / topics for
discussion:
1) I agree that the "SHOULD... UNLESS" pattern ought be documented.
I had never thought of this before. I kind of like the idea, especially since
SHOULD has always meant "MUST unless you really know what you're doing" but
that last bit, though strong, is still pretty subjective. Having a tool to
make it more explicit is a nice idea.
2) I strongly believe that authors should be encouraged to enumerate
the potential subjects of conformance terms, and to use them in every
instance.
For example, a requirement like this:
"""The Foo header MUST contain the "bar" directive"""
is ambiguous; it doesn't specify who has to do what. Rather,
"""Senders MUST include the "bar" directive when producing the Foo
header; recipients that receive a Foo header without a "bar" directive
MUST ..."""
is unambiguous (assuming that the spec defines the terms "sender" and
"recipient").
...or at least say at the bottom of such a collection that
fields/messages/pages/whatever that don't conform MUST be (default treatment
here).
4) WRT to the status of the document -- if people really feel that we
don't need to revise 2119, I'd define this as a superset of 2119 and
NOT obsolete it; i.e., have documents opt into it. However, I'd hope
that we can get consensus that it's time to build on what 2119 offers.
I don't see a big deal with rendering RFC2119 obsolete. Or perhaps more
accurately, I don't like the argument that we can't just because lots of
outside SDOs reference it, or any similarly useful BCP we use could become
set-in-stone as soon as others decide they like it. We have a mechanism for
checking whether a given RFC has been replaced or not; we all have to learn to
use it, so I think others should as well.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf