|Subject:||Re: Metadiscussion on changes in draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation|
|Date:||Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:51:18 -0800|
Martin Rex wrote:
what do you want to say with this? That implementors should ignore at least half of the MUSTs and SHOULDs in IETF documents, because they don't make any sense, create unnecessary interop problems or are otherwise harmful -- and should not be in the document in the first place?
All in all, that pretty much sums up the current (and long standing) situation, IMHO.
Bob Braden _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation detail, Yngve Nysaeter Pettersen|
|Next by Date:||Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one, Michael D'Errico|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: Metadiscussion on changes in draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation, Martin Rex|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [TLS] Metadiscussion on changes in draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation, Martin Rex|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|