Re: forward the information model

Hi Leif,

(Adding krb-wg list since we're not quite done merging yet.)

On 12/05/2012 08:06 AM, Leif Johansson wrote:
> 
> At ATL I had a conversation with Pete about our use of RFC2119 language
> in the information model draft.
> 
> We agreed that one way forward is for us to drop the _reference_ to RFC2119
> and replace the standard 2119 boilerplate with language of our own that
> explain the terms MUST, SHOULD, etc.
> 
> We both agree that dropping the use of all-caps words of this type is
> probably
> not a viable option.
> 
> I'd like the WGs comment on the plan before proposing language text.

I think you ought take silence as "yes" here since this has been
a known trickiness for this draft and the plan seems like it
ought make no difference to the WG (the text you add might, but
the plan ought not). So I'd say firing ahead and sending your
proposed wording change to the list for review ought be fine here.

Cheers,
S.

> 
>         Best R
>         Leif
> 
>