- From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 06:57:55 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, HTTP <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> On Nov 21, 2014, at 3:50 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > On 18 Nov 2014, at 7:36 pm, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >> Regardless, unlike MAY and MUST, you can’t just use “SHOULD” and “SHOULD NOT” in a document. They require an explanation of why you should not, and under what circumstances your are allowed to do that something that your should not do. > > While it is good practice, this is not a hard and fast rule, Yoav. Certainly there has been many an RFC published with an unqualified SHOULD (or ten). Not hard and fast, but recently it’s been a good way of getting gen—art comments and DISCUSSes. > > Please don't portray your position as an absolute requirement of the IETF. > >> So, if we agree with you, we need to complete the sentence, “HTTP/2.0 clients and server SHOULD NOT use ciphers from this list unless …” > > "... unless the server is deployed to communicate with a known population of clients, or is willing to accept that some clients will refuse to communicate with it.” WFM Yoav
Received on Friday, 21 November 2014 04:58:26 UTC