RE: [v6tc] v6tc

Hi Pekka,

I can live with what you suggest, provided that the
should and mays are made deployment scenario specific, i.e. (which I think was
what you said in an earlier mail, anyway, though this mail made me doubt it a little bit).

Which of the various requirements that a potential solution supports will
be described in a trade-off document, not in the requirements document as such, I suppose ?

BR, Karen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas@netcore.fi]
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:53 AM
> To: Karen E. Nielsen (AH/LMD)
> Cc: 'Kurt Erik Lindqvist'; 'Tim Chown'; v6tc@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [v6tc] v6tc - is there life
> 
> 
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Karen E. Nielsen (AH/LMD) wrote:
> > Another issue. I have some problems with SHOULD and MAY 
> > requirements. I would much rather stick with must-only 
> requirements, 
> > perhaps with the addition that a certain feature (requirement) 
> > possibly could be profited from in this and that deployment 
> > scenario. I do not see the point in having SHOULD requirements and 
> > in general I do not see the point in using the words MUST, SHOULD 
> > and MAY in a requirement document.
> 
> I think it's useful to be able document those features which we think 
> really must be in the solution, as must, but also be able to express 
> those features we'd really, really like to see in the solution if 
> that's feasible from the solution's point of view, as "should". 
> Otherwise the result is either: 1) too few requirements to make a 
> realistically usable solution in all the scenarios, or 2) 
> elevating of 
> too many 'should' statements to musts.
> 
> The usefulness of "may" requirements comes not that they're mays, but 
> from the fact that the reader sees that those requirements have been 
> considered and they are NOT shoulds or musts.  That could be 
> accomplished as a non-requirements section as well, of 
> course. I don't 
> have personally a strong opinion on what to do with these, removing 
> them would be OK by me.
> 
> I agree that uppercase keywords shouldn't be used, unless we define 
> when those mean ourselves.
> 
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
> 

_______________________________________________
v6tc mailing list
v6tc@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc