Re: [AFS3-std] Re: Last Call: draft-allbery-afs-srv-records (DNS SRV Resource Records for AFS) to Proposed Standard

[Russ Allbery <rra at stanford.edu>]

SM <sm at resistor.net> writes:
> At 17:03 01-02-10, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> Ah, thank you.  Changed to SHOULD on the assumption that the (pre-2119)
>> language in RFC 1034 was intended to have roughly the same meaning.

> "SHOULD" as a requirement first appeared in RFC 1122.  It does not
> necessarily apply to RFCs published before RFC 2119.

I guess I'm not clear on what you think the correct fix is.  I'm hesitant
to use a lowercase "should" in a document that explicitly references RFC
2119, since then it's ambiguous what that is supposed to mean in terms of
a standard requirement.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>