On Aug 31, 2011, at 9:12 AM, Hector wrote:
Keith Moore wrote:
On Aug 31, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Hector wrote:
In my view, SHOULD are user protocol options to set.
In my view, SHOULD should rarely be used for optional protocol features,
because optional protocol features should themselves be rare. And the
primary purpose of SHOULD is not to permit optional protocol features.
If SHOULD is read as a MUST IMPLEMENT, and that also implies MUST USE with no
provision to disable then its should of been a MUST in the first place.
Just because a feature is optional does not mean that it's a protocol
feature... i.e. it doesn't mean that it affects how the implementation
interacts with peers.
SHOULD is IMO most often useful not when specifying how a protocol acts "on the
wire", but when specifying how a protocol needs to be implemented on a
particular platform, where the precise semantics, API details, etc. naturally
differ from one platform to another.
Why even bother with SHOULD, and use have MUST and MAY?
To get people out of the rathole of trying to specify exactly how everything
must work in excruciating detail, in a world where there is inherently going to
be some necessary variation.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf