On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 5:02 AM Gavin Brown <gavin.br...@icann.org> wrote:
> A server may need to disregard the provided TTL values in order to address > security and stability issues. So "MUST" is not appropriate, because (to > quote RFC 2119) there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances > to ignore those values. But a normative keyword is needed to establish the > expectation that client-provided TTLs will be honoured by the server. > "SHOULD" seems appropriate because it's stronger than "MAY" but weaker than > "MUST". > I think that's a fine use of SHOULD. What I'm suggesting is that we might want to add a phrase or sentence that gives an example of when you might anticipate one might knowingly disregard a TTL. BCP 14 says basically "SHOULD means MUST unless you really know what you're doing", and it's often helpful to include a bit of prose to help the implementer meet that bar. -MSK
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
