I would offer that working groups that say to do something that may or may not
hold in foreseen or unforeseen circumstances is most likely working on a
protocol that is way too complex and is begging for interoperability problems.
What ever happened to building simple, point-solution protocols that followed
the hour-glass and end-to-end principles, and then building your complex
protocols out of them?
On Aug 29, 2011, at 11:11 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:44 PM, Eric Burger wrote:
I would offer that ANY construction of SHOULD without an UNLESS is a MAY.
The essential beauty of SHOULD is that it gets specification writers and
working groups out of the all-too-common rathole of trying to anticipate and
nail down every exceptional case.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf