Hi Druhv! Thanks for the follow-up.
From: Dhruv Dhody <d...@dhruvdhody.com> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 5:45 AM To: Roman Danyliw <r...@cert.org> Cc: pce@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Pce] AD Review of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-17 Warning: External Sender - do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Roman, Thanks for taking on the AD role for this I-D. On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 12:35 AM Roman Danyliw <r...@cert.org<mailto:r...@cert.org>> wrote: ** Section 4.2.1 SR Policy Name: SR Policy name, as defined in [RFC9256]. It SHOULD be a string of printable ASCII characters, without a NULL terminator. The use of SHOULD here implies that the encoding could be something other than printable ASCII. That would be prohibited by the text in Section 2.1 of RFC9256. Perhaps s/SHOULD/must/. Same comment for nearly identical text in Section 4.2.3 Dhruv: FWIW past RFCs that encode strings in PCEP have used a similar language - RFC 8231, RFC 9358! That said, I don't mind making a change going forward. [Roman] Does the WG remember why this “SHOULD” was used? Would a UTF string or non-printable ASCII be acceptable since the “SHOULD” suggests there are cases where printable ASCII need not be used? Roman
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org
