ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2119bis

2011-08-31 15:20:04
Keith Moore wrote:

The Point being that if Tony's I-D has it as it was shown above, then it would be incorrect too in its understanding of RFC2119 because the non-normative words are clearly concepts related to a non-required mandate.

As far as I'm concerned, Tony's I-D is a nonstarter, and therefore irrelevant.

Oh the irony in the "Failure to Read" labeling category, the art of selective synergism, :) if only to acknowledge the rich IETF-MAN-YEARS behind the production of this I-D and its obvious relationship to RFC2119 and any future consideration for a RFC2119BIS. :)

Thanks
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>