On Aug 30, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > Dear Eric; > > I support adding the SHOULD ... UNLESS formalism (although maybe it should be > MUST... UNLESS). It would be useful as there will be times where the UNLESS > can be specified and has been given due consideration at the time of writing. > That, however, will not always be the case. (More inline). [snip] > But how about > > SHOULD do FOO UNLESS you have given serious consideration as to the > consequences of not doing FOO. > > Isn't that really the original intention of SHOULD ? Do we gain anything if > that is added every time it is used?
Looking at this from a protocol perspective, SHOULD now equals MAY. There is no objective way of deciding when to do FOO or not. [snip]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
