On 4/3/2017 1:00 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
with or without an applicability statement, the underlying message of an rfc
from the dnsop working group is not "we think this is good engineering" but
rather "if you want to do this in a way that interoperates with others who are
also doing it, here is one way to achieve that result."
so, phrases like "should not be" are irrelevant in this place at this time.
There's a legitimate substitute for the should(not) statements:
Statements of implication.
Along with describing the how, describing what will ensue, is likely to
ensue, or is at least a possibility. These might even be labeled
'downsides' or 'upsides' if the authors want to get frisky.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
