"Danny Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Then you don't understand the paragraph you just quoted. SHOULD is a
> recommendation and not a requirement. You cannot violate a
> recommendation. You used the word "must" which is not in the section you
> quoted.
If you simply ignore a SHOULD and don't do what it says by default
without an evaluation of the consequences, you are ignoring the RFC. The
definition of "compliance" prohibits ignoring SHOULDs, though it does not
require you to do what the SHOULD says. Not complying with a SHOULD because
it requires effort or the API requires an extra bind to do it or the like is
not compliant.
DS
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
