| RE: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Glen Zorn (gwz) (gwz |
|
| Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:52:32 -0400 (EDT) | |
Jari Arkko writes: ... > >> "The application data is optional and may not be >> used by some applications." > > s/may not/MAY NOT/ Let's not get carried away. Is this sentence normative or informative? I think the latter. In any case, the "MAY NOT" construct DOES NOT :-) appear in RFC 2119. > >> (*) my word count script gives me the following results: >> >> must 29 >> MUST 61 >> >> may 136 >> MAY 8 >> >> required 26 >> REQUIRED 2 >> >> shall 0 >> SHALL 2 >> >> should 17 >> SHOULD 24 >> >> recommended 4 >> RECOMMENDED 15 >> >> optional 11 >> OPTIONAL 1 > > Ok -- we need to look at each one... > >> Requested change >> >> Capitalize the key words mentioned here above i.e. at least in 6.1.1 >> and F.1 > > Agreed. > > --Jari > _______________________________________________ > eap mailing list > eap [at] frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
-
Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Florent Bersani, October 4 2004
-
Re: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Jari Arkko, October 4 2004
- RE: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Glen Zorn (gwz), October 4 2004
- Re: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Florent Bersani, October 5 2004
- Re: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Jari Arkko, October 5 2004
- RE: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Glen Zorn (gwz), October 5 2004
- Re: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Florent Bersani, October 6 2004
-
Re: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words Jari Arkko, October 4 2004
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.