Re: [tsvwg] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-21: (with COMMENT)

[Bob Briscoe <[e-mail]>]

Robert, Thank you for your review. See [BB]

On 28/11/2023 13:29, Robert Wilton via Datatracker wrote:
> Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-21: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for this document, it is well written and an interesting read.
>
> I have just one very minor comment for you to consider please:
>
> (1) p 4, sec 1.  Introduction
>
>     Therefore, the capitalized terms 'SHOULD' or 'SHOULD NOT' are often
>     used in preference to 'MUST' or 'MUST NOT', because it is difficult
>     to know the compromises that will be necessary in each protocol
>     design.  If a particular protocol design chooses not to follow a
>     'SHOULD (NOT)' given in the advice below, it MUST include a sound
>     justification.
>
> I would suggest "must include a sound justification", i.e., otherwise it is
> unclear how the justification affects protocol conformance.

[BB] I don't understand. Surely it's very clear... If a protocol spec 
does not include a sound justification for why it does not follow any of 
the SHOULD (NOT)s given in this BCP, it does not comply with this BCP-to-be.

To my mind, conformance is only unclear without the 'MUST' in caps?


Bob

>
> Regards,
> Rob
>
>
>

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/