Re: MUST versus SHOULD in application decisions

["William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <slrn659f1r.1ha.lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, on 10/27/97 
   at 04:07 PM, lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Lutz Donnerhacke) said:

>* William H. Geiger III wrote:
>>must not provide to the user. If in the Appendix you wish to put
>>application recommendations that is fine but the wording as you have it
>>now is unacceptable.

>In this case it should be moved to chapter nine 'Security
>Considerations'.

Sounds great!

There is a lot of stuff I could put in there that I would not feel
comfortable putting in the RFC itself. :)

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBNFS+7o9Co1n+aLhhAQHl5QQAx7apxdI5qtXfbo8O4c0P+9/G08taB+Pa
BGdnxwPkedjzFInwAk5NlGbNRBiuoSB79uhncYNfVrfouuyGsIrudCZ/IGHB3xtA
gp9sNfkmP0nlNcThEShT61QKW/dPKnbGv5GnbuKCPFcQ4BR0kvFk2tWJTVDob5bN
S/iQto1ht2w=
=g9AV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----