> -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Campbell <b...@nostrum.com> > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 5:28 PM > To: Tim Hollebeek <tim.holleb...@digicert.com> > Cc: Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com>; Tim Hollebeek via Datatracker > <nore...@ietf.org>; sec...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-opsawg-9092- > update....@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Last-Call] [secdir] Secdir last call review of > draft-ietf-opsawg- > 9092-update-09 > > On Jan 26, 2024, at 3:53 PM, Tim Hollebeek > <tim.hollebeek=40digicert....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > > > Yes, that's the correct paragraph I was referring to. > > > > Unfortunately, RFC 2119 does actually imply that these words can't be > > used in non-2119 ways: > > > > "In many standards track documents several words are used to signify > > the requirements in the specification. These words are often > > capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be > > interpreted in IETF documents." > > > > I would also prefer it if the uncapitalized versions retained their > > original English meanings, but these sentences from 2119 are why I > > recommend avoiding such usages. > > That was updated by RFC 8174 to say “when capitalized”. > > Ben.
Oh, awesome. I had somehow missed that this had gotten fixed. -Tim
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
