Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements

ietf

2013-10-29 16:00:07

On Oct 29, 2013, at 1:29 PM, Bradner, Scott <sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu> wrote:

seems to me to be completely reasonable to say MUST include the number of the 
RFC that describes 
the protocol being registered (for example)


It is also completely reasonable to say "needs to include" as well.

--Paul Hoffman

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, (continued) Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Julian Reschke Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Bradner, Scott Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Julian Reschke Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Bradner, Scott Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Ted Lemon Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Barry Leiba Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, ned+ietf Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Bjoern Hoehrmann Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Julian Reschke Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, ned+ietf Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Paul Hoffman <= Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Ted Lemon Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, John Levine

Previous by Date:	Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Bradner, Scott
Next by Date:	Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Barry Leiba
Previous by Thread:	Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, ned+ietf
Next by Thread:	Re: RFC2119 keywords in registration requirements, Ted Lemon
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]