-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Thomas Narten
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 11:02 AM
To: Russ Housley
Cc: IETF; iesg(_at_)iesg(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Errata against RFC 5226 rejected
I don't see the need for this. "should" seems good enough for me. Also,
the wording "any ranges that are ... etc." implies to me that the list
provided are examples and if a category doesn't apply, you don't
include it.
In other words, I don't see a problem with the existing text that
warrants bothering with an errata.
But maybe I'm missing what the problem is.
+1.
-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf