Subject: Re: draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-01.txt

From: Steve Mattson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 20:48:56 -0500

Date:    Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:16:23 -0500
  To:      [email-masked]
  From:    Daniel Senie <[email-masked]>
  Subject: draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-01.txt

  This updated draft has hit the repository. I captured comments from
  Pittsburgh and from the mailing list for the most part, but may well
  have missed some of each. Please read and comment.
  
  Dan
  
  -- 
  -----------------------------------------------------------------
  Daniel Senie                                        [email-masked]
  Amaranth Networks Inc.                    http://www.amaranth.com

I looked it over earlier today.  I came away with some confusion 
about the usage of "SHOULD", "must", and "required" throughout
the draft.  Is the intent to constrain configurations as with a
requirement such that the "SHOULD"s could be rewritten as "MUST"s?
Or, is the goal to publish as a BCP, where the "must"s could be 
rewritten as "it is recommended that" or something similar?  I'd
have a better idea of how to read the draft if you could clarify
this point.  Thanks.

Steve Mattson
University of Michigan