Re: [core] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-25: (with COMMENT)

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

>     5.3.1.  Registration Update
>
>        The update interface is used by the registering endpoint to refresh
>        or update its registration with an RD.  To use the interface, the
>        registering endpoint sends a POST request to the registration
>        resource returned by the initial registration operation.
>
>        An update MAY update the lifetime or the base URI registration
>        parameters "lt", "base" as in Section 5.  Parameters that are not
>        being changed SHOULD NOT be included in an update.  Adding parameters
>        that have not changed increases the size of the message but does not
>        have any other implications.  Parameters MUST be included as query
>        parameters in an update operation as in Section 5.
>
> The "SHOULD NOT" feels a bit strong to me, and I would prefer to see this as
> "MAY NOT".  In many cases, if the configuration is not too big then providing
> the full configuration makes it easy to guarantee that the receiver has exactly
> the correct configuration.  I appreciate that there are many cases where from
> an endpoint perspective it may want to keep the update small, but if I was
> doing this from a CT, I think that I would rather just resend the entire
> configuration, if it is not large.

"MAY NOT" is not a BCP 14 key word, and isn't a clear phrasing anyway.
The way to downgrade the strength here is to change "SHOULD NOT" to
"should not".

But keep in mind that this stuff is intended for constrained
environments, and it might be more important than you think to keep
message sizes down to a minimum.  That's the reason for the BCP 14
"SHOULD NOT".

Barry