Subject: [yam] #13: RFC 2119 keywords and Idnits

From: "yam issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 08:37:42 -0000

#13: RFC 2119 keywords and Idnits
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Reporter:  sm+ietf@…                    |       Owner:     
     Type:  defect                       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                        |   Milestone:     
Component:  5321bis-smtp-pre-evaluation  |     Version:     
 Severity:  -                            |    Keywords:     
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Comments about RFC 2119 keywords and Idnits posted by Alexey Melnikov on 6
 Dec 2009

 ome extra comments based on running IDnits (which report downrefs and few
 other things):

  == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL',
 'SHOULD',
     or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119.
 Please
     use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what
 you
     mean).

     Found 'SHOULD not' in this paragraph:

     When an SMTP server returns a permanent error status (5yz) code
     after the DATA command is completed with <CRLF>.<CRLF>, it MUST NOT
 make
     any subsequent attempt to deliver the message.  As with temporary
 error
     status codes, the SMTP client retains responsibility for the message,
 but
     SHOULD not again attempt delivery to the same server without user
 review
     of the message and response and appropriate intervention.

   [1]   Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, RFC 821,
         August 1982.

 Is this reference truly Normative? It looks Informative to me.

 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam/current/msg00215.html

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/yam/trac/ticket/13>
yam <http://tools.ietf.org/yam/>