Thanks Murray, > COMMENT: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Why is the SHOULD in Section 8 only a SHOULD? Why might I legitimately > not do what it says?
I need to think about this a bit. My first reaction is that it shouldn't even use 2119 language in that sentence. Probably "can be protected against". Cheers, Adrian _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
