IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 08 May 2013 21:30 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F019D21F8ED8; Wed, 8 May 2013 14:30:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.195
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.195 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.404, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 Y-NO0SqDSG3Y; Wed, 8 May 2013 14:30:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3402221F884F; Wed, 8 May 2013 14:30:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.145.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r48LUEZH005813 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 8 May 2013 14:30:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1368048627; bh=OA9vcS4BW/kx8g9pAuYDkazTHpkIu9UlOHgrVccQ/1o=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=LIGwws4am02FKeDoFRUVk4AWvSfoVGOw0O8Do0NDOhlmdEd/Hz4VrC6wpMotFybLf PTBhQ01vMya6Paf1vmKhDeMPQQKWh626xwpIkgF5puooi3+iu39WuohZk4teur3GbO uHPJIX2+Z9ClmbyRXd67+F+klFSJSqkxLniNjsJ4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1368048627; i=@elandsys.com; bh=OA9vcS4BW/kx8g9pAuYDkazTHpkIu9UlOHgrVccQ/1o=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=IQ9RbsVw+S5T8kz1AAimow5cQ5moKT2ybR0w5rl+dd4Hk8xJhKlg0njCzHOMvqyv+ zWOLHTA5f92U0lx+xbJJc1EkrhllXGSIIrsQcWDp2xhy+9v8Yxajw8W0h2ekloYOAL MHMwWvMZTPAD225c+IqdmEAPQKD5jVrZ0x/uRA+Q=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130508130025.0c082b18@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 13:44:44 -0700
To: ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2a9o5ckpu.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130428233426.0b62fed0@elandnews.com> <20130430083206.GD46852@elstar.local> <6.2.5.6.2.20130508092054.0c02f378@resistor.net> <m2a9o5ckpu.wl%randy@psg.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 09 May 2013 20:07:08 -0700
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-01
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 21:30:30 -0000

At 12:53 08-05-2013, Randy Bush wrote:
>MAY != SHOULD

The text is as follows: "The name SHOULD be fully qualified whenever 
possible".  If the working group would like a RFC 2119 SHOULD it 
would help if there is an explanation in the sentence for the reader 
weigh the implications of not following that.

For what it is worth Eric Burger posted an analysis of "SHOULD" usage 
in a different draft ( 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mile/current/msg01021.html ).

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email