Re: [Ltru] Issue #41 (AD comment #8) section 3.5 SHOULD vs MUST

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>]

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

> From: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis at icu-project.org>
> To: "Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org>
> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 6:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #41 (AD comment #8) section 3.5 SHOULD vs MUST
>
> Your message was cut off. Let me try to answer anyway. If someone submits a
> registration form that is either (a) factually incorrect, or (b) breaks the
> MUST clause (and they are MUSTs for good reason), then in review those
> problems are pointed out, corrections are made, and the proposal is
> resubmitted.
> I don't think this is a real problem.
...

Getting back to the text in question in section 3.5:
|   The fields in the "Record Requested" section SHOULD follow the
|   requirements in Section 3.1.

I think the point is that we don't want to reject otherwise
legitimate requests just because the submitter didn't get some
element of syntax exactly right in the request.  As Mark points
out, the review process is there for good reason.  The SHOULD
is there because it is operationally helpful if the request
gets every last detail of syntax exactly right.

Randy