IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 2119bis

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Sat, 03 September 2011 16:37 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B902721F8B1D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:37:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TriwzGuXfAik for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:37:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.63]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4705A21F84E7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:37:29 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=PGSiRPdF3aGGEK6VeswfbRJmdi6qAbXD/pqm1blUIeTahY5dq29j2DITW52uYxjt; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [76.254.51.143] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1QztFJ-00048R-I8 for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:39:05 -0400
Message-ID: <002d01cc6a58$04d2ec60$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20110903141404.BDD8A18C0E1@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <4E623F33.3020707@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 2119bis
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 09:39:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478
X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d8887f779e183b2ee288b3aa2e79756176b503f1c33a444a69f9350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 76.254.51.143
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 16:37:29 -0000

Hi -

> From: "Hector" <sant9442@gmail.com>
> Cc: <ietf@ietf.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 7:52 AM
> Subject: Re: 2119bis
...
> For protocol v2.0, X2 is a improved version of X1.
> 
>     SHOULD USE X2 IF POSSIBLE, IF NOT
>     MUST USE X1
> 
> Its the same as saying
> 
>     MUST USE X2 first or X1 as a fallback
...

No, those two formulations mean different things.
If the first "SHOULD" were a "MUST", then they'd be close
but still not equivalent.

Randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email