On May 19, 2011, at 4:53 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > In RFC 2119 (the document that defines MUST, SHOULD, etc.), "MUST" does not > mean "vitally important" and "SHOULD" does not mean "really really important, > but less important than MUST". "MUST" means "you have to do this or you're > not going to interoperate." "SHOULD" means, "there are ways to not do this > which will still interoperate, but you had better know what those ways are > and you better be sure to do them, and if you don't, then you MUST NOT do > this." That is, "SHOULD" is equivalent to "MUST unless you know exactly what > you are doing."
Sounds like we SHOULD all go back and re-read RFC 2119. -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
