Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements

On 2013-10-29 21:46, Bradner, Scott wrote:
> see rfc 2418 page 3 as well as RFC 2434 page 3 for an example of non-protocol 
> uses of 2119 terms
>
> fwiw - I have seen 2119 terms used in registration type RFCs for rather many 
> years
> I think it is too late to unwind that clock
>
> Scott
>
> Scott Bradner
Well yes, I've seen that too.

But there *is* confusion about whether it's the right approach, and it 
would be really cool if there was some consistency with respect to this.
Best regards, Julian