Re: Review of draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-03
Alexey Melnikov <[email protected]> Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:29:17 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.imapext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi SM, On 02/03/2016 15:25, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Alexey, > At 06:05 02-03-2016, Alexey Melnikov wrote: [snip] >>> "It then MAY proceed as described in Section 3." >>> >>> Why is there is a RFC 2119 "MAY"? >> Because an implementation can eat the literal or send BYE response >> (as per section 3), or do something else. I would be Ok with changing >> MAY to SHOULD. > > What I meant was that you could use a "may" (It may then proceed ...). IMHO, it is an implementation choice, so use of MAY is appropriate. _______________________________________________ imapext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext