[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: URL critical extensions (Was: draft-ietf-ldapbis-url-04.txt comments)

Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>

I would prefer to use language like to that of governing
criticality of controls:
    If the extension is recognized it implementation MUST make
    use of it.  Otherwise (the extension is not recognized),
    the implementation MUST error if critical and MUST ignore if
    if not critical.

I am OK with this suggestion. Note that the current text we are replacing uses SHOULD in some places, e.g., "The client SHOULD obey supported extensions that are non-critical." I am not sure if the interoperability concerns are high enough to warrant the use of MUST... but the same rationale that was applied to the protocol document probably applies here as well.

-Mark