On 9/1/2011 7:49 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
I do not believe there is any need to change RFC 2119.
...
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Scott O. Bradner<sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu>
wrote:
...
1/ I am far from convinced that there is a need to update RFC 2119
Predictably, the draft has prompted quite a few postings that seem to be intent
on re-inventing a core portion of the IETF documentation mechanism.
Folks should remember that this is a system that has been functioning quite well
for some decades and I am not aware of any recent emergencies that justify
starting over or making major changes.
The policy when seeking to change an established, essential, well-running
systems is to make as /few/ changes as possible, not as /many/...
Ideally, this means making no changes at all, of course. That is, any proposal
for a change MUST explain why the change is /essential/.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf