Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art: Last call review of draft-ietf-netext-radius-pmip6-06

[jouni korhonen <[e-mail]>]

Hi, 


On Jan 16, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote:


>>> s7: I am not sure if the various must's and may's ought to be MUST's and
>>> MAY's.
>>> 
> e.g s7.1 "This interface must support the transfer of
>   accounting records needed for service control and charging."
> I couldn't decide whether this was a protocol requirement or statement
> about what the implementation ought to do. 'must support' is ambiguous
> and not being a RADIUS expert (and being too lazy today to go chase the
> relevant spec) I wasn't sure whether this put any requirement on the
> message structure or just required the user/implementer to send the
> reklevant data using the facilities that were there.  In the second case
> 'must' is clearly fine. Similarly in 7.2.

Hmm.. it is about statement for the implementers. Those indirectly refer
to existing attributes so having a MUST there is probably a good idea.


> 
> Thinking about it, the 'may's' in ss5.2, 6.2 and 7.3 are correct.
> 

Ack.

- Jouni

> Once again thanks for the speedy turnaround.
> 
> Regards,
> Elwyn
>> 
>> Any specific example?
>> 
>> - Jouni
>> 
>