my feeling and belief is that RFC 2119 only gives SHOULD and RECOMMENDED the
same normative requirement level, but that it does not override or change the
distinct meanings of these words in English. sentences using each of these
terms have different meanings in English, even when those sentences appear in
RFCs.
-michael thornburgh
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of John C Klensin
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 5:40 AM
--On Monday, June 24, 2013 07:52 -0400 Phillip Hallam-Baker
<hallam(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
They are not synonyms
Lets go back to 1980:
Implementations SHOULD support DES
vs
RECOMMENDED encryption algorithms: DES, IDEA
Actually, that is the point. The usage above, although much
earlier, reflects the Protocol Specification/ Applicability
Statement split rather well.
But 2119's language makes the two terms substitutable for and
equivalent to each other, which is about as close a definition
of "synonyms" as one can find. What I said is that making them
equivalent was probably a mistake and that treating them that
was should be discouraged. Others expressed agreement with that
assessment.
Personally, I don't think the problem is severe enough to reopen
2119. If others disagree and believe that 2119 is generating
enough problems to be worth an update, I await a draft.
So, other than quibbling about the "synonym" issue -- not
generally, which no one has claimed, but in context with 2119--
are you disagreeing and, if so, about what?
john