Keith Moore wrote:
The Point being that if Tony's I-D has it as it was shown above,
then it would be incorrect too in its understanding of RFC2119
because the non-normative words are clearly concepts related to a
non-required mandate.
As far as I'm concerned, Tony's I-D is a nonstarter, and therefore irrelevant.
Oh the irony in the "Failure to Read" labeling category, the art of
selective synergism, :) if only to acknowledge the rich IETF-MAN-YEARS
behind the production of this I-D and its obvious relationship to
RFC2119 and any future consideration for a RFC2119BIS. :)
Thanks
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
