"MUST NOT" != "NOT REQUIRED"
See RFC 2119, but basically:
"MUST NOT" implies an absolute prohibition, not an optional requirement.
Kurt
At 11:56 PM 2001-09-19, Jiwoong Lee wrote:
>All,
>
>This is about the requirement level in the Internet specification.
>
>If a statement has the requirement level of 'MUST NOT' while it has an exceptional
>case, and while
>the exceptional case does not elucidate its requirement level, what is the
>appropriate requirement level of this exceptional case ?
>
>I guess the answer is 'MAY'. Are you agreeable to this ?
>
>I think ICMPv6 specification has the similar statements in it, regarding to the
>requirement level of the generation of ICMPv6 packet in response to a multicast
>packet or to a link local multicast packet.
>
>
>Jiwoong
