Subject: [GROW] IESG requested changes on draft-ietf-grow-wkc-behavior

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 10:55:30 -0400

Hi there all,

The IESG felt that (esp because this is listed as Standards Track)
that we should replace:
"Vendors SHOULD clearly document the behavior of "set" directive in
their implementations."
with:
"Vendors MUST clearly document the behavior of "set" directive in
their implementations."
(s/SHOULD/MUST/).

The document had sufficient support to be approved as is, but I think
that this is a useful improvement, and so agreed that we would make
that change (and the document is approved). I was initially
uncomfortable with the IETF telling vendors what they "MUST" do, but
then realized that we implicitly do this all throughout the IETF
series. Please let me know by  2019-06-19 if you *strongly* object to
this change.

Thank you all,
W

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

---

From: David Farmer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 11:58:28 -0500

> series. Please let me know by  2019-06-19 if you *strongly* object to
This change doesn't my support for the document, I still support it.

I brought this up previously, so feel free to ignore it.

In RFC1997 the three Well-known Communities are defined using MUST NOT,
that seems at odds with the idea that the communities can be removed,
SHOULD NOT seems compatible with the ability to remove them and effectively
ignore them.

Thanks.

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[email-masked]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================