Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Mon, 14 June 2010 15:17 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=oOaTHiUvmjZcXcUy4omUMyhD3bxXhtjec0z5yhHSEu7iX/wHntithSiht6wvKC4nud bxjsYBCrWz6/HkgAb09whZivxFsvBrISmzPDn0KFcmfSJ9u8IgpvaSSvUOa8h25XlHqw 2EiwuvJseB/K+K1+BO/mUQ3s++uoFsdFGMY+g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201006141257.o5ECvkna020878@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
References: <20100612034512.CB07A3A687D@core3.amsl.com> <201006141257.o5ECvkna020878@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:17:49 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTine-pn6eZMa5X8pqN-0NguwygB4j_g533gKDdlj@mail.gmail.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
To: mrex@sap.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0016e6d9a3bae638420488fefd70"
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt
Precedence: list

Not too surprisingly rfc4366-bis derives from rfc4366 which had mixed use of
SHALL and MUST.

Donald
=============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
155 Beaver Street
Milford, MA 01757 USA
d3e3e3@gmail.com


On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com> wrote:

> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> >
> >       Title           : Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions:
> Extension Definitions
> >       Author(s)       : D. Eastlake 3rd
> >       Filename        : draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt
> >       Pages           : 31
> >       Date            : 2010-06-11
>
> What irritates me slightly about the document style is the
> mixture of the term "SHALL" and "MUST".  While its true that
> rfc2119 allows both terms, I would prefer IETF documents to
> use MUST/MUST NOT over SHALL/SHALL NOT and avoid a mixture,
> unless there is a rationale behind it, like adopting text as-is
> from other standards/standarization bodies.
>
> -Martin
>  _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>

[TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt Internet-Drafts
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Juho Vähä-Herttua
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Peter Gutmann
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Juho Vähä-Herttua
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Juho Vähä-Herttua
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Juho Vähä-Herttua
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Martin Rex
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Juho Vähä-Herttua
[TLS] max_fragment_length values (was: RE: I-D Ac… Pasi.Eronen
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Donald Eastlake
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Martin Rex
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Peter Gutmann
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Juho Vähä-Herttua
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
[TLS] DTLS and large messages t.petch
Re: [TLS] DTLS and large messages Juho Vähä-Herttua
Re: [TLS] DTLS and large messages Michael Tüxen
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL
Re: [TLS] DTLS and large messages t.petch
Re: [TLS] DTLS and large messages Michael Tüxen
Re: [TLS] DTLS and large messages Pasi.Eronen
Re: [TLS] DTLS and large messages Michael Tüxen
Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-0… Peter Gutmann