From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 15:13:18 CST
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>> Although I see that RFC 2119 doesn't actually define fully compliant
>> and conditionally compliant; other standards instead add that
>> information to the RFC 2119 keywords. That's unfortunate; I wonder why
>> that is?
> One of the wonders of "hindsight" :-) .
I don't think hindsight is the right word. Unconditionally and
conditionally compliant were defined in RFC 1123.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>