Mark Hubbart wrote:
>
> On Jun 10, 2004, at 4:03 PM, Hal Fulton wrote:
>
> > I think part of the issue is the use of these modal auxiliaries.
> > (Thanks, Mrs. Sharp, my elementary English teacher who died last
> > month at 84.)
> >
> > Some RFCs use "must" for things that are mandatory and "should" for
> > things that are recommended or suggested. Or something like that.
> > They also use the terms "may" and "can" (I believe).
> >
> > I don't know whether all RFCs do this. I don't think they do.
>
> There's an RFC for that :) Seriously, I'm pretty sure there's an RFC
> that defines the meaning of "must", "should", "compliant", etc., that
> some RFCs reference.
>
> cheers,
> Mark
>

Austin posted the link, today.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2119.html

I'm sure Mrs. Sharp didn't check it ;-)


daz