Re: [bmwg] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Michael Richardson <[email protected]> Fri, 11 Feb 2022 13:45:16 -0500

Newsgroups	gmane.ietf.general,gmane.ietf.bmwg
Message-ID	<17872.1644605116@localhost>

Scott Bradner <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Imperatives of the type defined in this memo must be used with care
    > and sparingly.  In particular, they MUST only be used where it is
    > actually required for interoperation or to limit behavior which has
    > potential for causing harm (e.g., limiting retransmisssions)  For
    > example, they must not be used to try to impose a particular method
    > on implementors where the method is not required for
    > interoperability.

My impression from the ~10 RFCs I've gotten out in the past three years
is that IESG of recent has been pushing for all SHOULDs that do not have
clear escape clauses to be MUSTs.
I guess if there is no interoperation issue at all, then they become MAYs.
(Or even, why is it even there?)

That's not consistent with the above text.

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 398 B)