[netconf] Fwd: A short note / request…

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

A message from one of the Ops Area ADs.   Good advice!

> From: Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>
> Date: June 30, 2024 at 6:14:51 AM EDT
> To: ops-chairs <[e-mail]>
> Subject: A short note / request…
> 
> 
> Hi there all,
> 
> As you've probably all realized by now, the IESG goes through cycles of what it thinks is super important.
> 
> We just had the annual IESG/IAB workshop, and what something that got a lots of attention is ensuring that when a document contains a SHOULD, it is clear about under what conditions the SHOULD does or does not apply. 
> 
> From RFC2119:
> "3. SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
>    may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
>    particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
>    carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
> 
> 4. SHOULD NOT   This phrase, or the phrase "NOT RECOMMENDED" mean that
>    there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the
>    particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full
>    implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed
>    before implementing any behavior described with this label."
> 
> 
> So, if a document says something like:
> You SHOULD NOT stick a fork in an electrical outlet.
> it should instead say something like:
> Unless the fork is made out of non-conductive plastic, you SHOULD NOT stick it in an outlet. 
> 
> I figured I'd let you know this so you ensure that documents that come through your WG fit this to minimize the chance of DISCUSS ballots.
> 
> W
>