| Re: Issue on eap-keying: capitalization of RFC 2119 requirements key words | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Jari Arkko (jari.arkko |
|
| Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 06:21:41 -0400 (EDT) | |
Hi Glen, Florent,
Yes. My mistake...
--Jari
"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.
Yes. My mistake...
Florent, "Application data MAY be an empty string"
This would be good enough for me. [But it seems that we need to take a decision about top-level issues first before looking at the individual text pieces.]
--Jari
-
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 Glen Zorn (gwz), October 4 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.