Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD
DRUMS WG Chair <chris.newman@innosoft.com> Thu, 27 July 2000 22:22 UTC
Received: from cs.utk.edu (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA22014 for <drums-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:22:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA16570; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:21:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:21:49 -0400
Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA16553; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:21:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA16539; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:21:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (192.9.25.1 -> mercury.Sun.COM) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:21:47 -0400
Received: from westmail2.West.Sun.COM ([129.153.100.30]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03828 for <drums@cs.utk.edu>; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nifty-jr.west.sun.com (nifty-jr.West.Sun.COM [129.153.12.95]) by westmail2.West.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL, v1.7) with ESMTP id PAA19843 for <drums@cs.utk.edu>; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:21:40 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:21:00 -0700
From: DRUMS WG Chair <chris.newman@innosoft.com>
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD
Message-ID: <6334158.3173700060@nifty-jr.west.sun.com>
In-Reply-To: <200007271515.LAA17836@astro.cs.utk.edu>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.3 (MacOS)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:drums-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The proposed replacement text on this topic has sufficient support to be considered. If you object to the proposed replacement text to the extent that you want to prolong this working group, please reply to this thread with the following information: (1) A description of the technical basis for your objection. (2) State whether or not you prefer the proposed replacement text to the text in draft 12. (3) Include alternative replacement text if you find both options unacceptable to the extent that you wish to prolong the working group. Debate about the technical basis for any proposed replacement text is also appropriate at this time, but please be concise. If there are no objections to the proposed replacement text, I will direct the document editor to include it in draft 13. - DRUMS WG Chair
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Maurizio Codogno
- suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Keith Moore
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD DRUMS WG Chair
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Bart Schaefer
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Michael Scharff
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD DRUMS WG Chair
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD D. J. Bernstein
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Eric S. Raymond
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Paul Hoffman / IMC
- 2nd suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Keith Moore
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD DRUMS WG Chair
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD Russ Allbery
- Re: suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD DRUMS WG Chair