On 10/1/07, Danny McPherson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 1, 2007, at 12:40 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
>
> > MUST is the directive to implementers of this specification, and is
> > appropriate (I didn't check, but presumably it is paired with "MUST be
> > ignored on receipt").
>
> I did look for that, didn't recall seeing it (or any other error
> handling, etc.., for that matter).


I've added that.  What other error handling do you think might be useful
to define?

Alia
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to