[Gnso-newgtld-wg] MUST, SHOULD, SHALL etc

Tue May 26 16:37:21 UTC 2020

Thanks Anne.  I don't believe we have ever said that the IETF definitions are the ones we adopting.  They are helpful, but they are not the ones we have adopted.  We will make this clear.

Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President
Com Laude | Valideus
D: +1.703.635.7514
E: jeff.neuman at comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 12:34 PM
To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] MUST, SHOULD, SHALL etc

Jeff, Cheryl, et al - below I paste the IETF definitions that were linked - note, for example, that "should" says "can be ignored" under certain circumstances - not sure anyone in the WG ever had that understanding of "should".

Anne

Network Working Group                                         S. Bradner
Request for Comments: 2119                            Harvard University
BCP: 14                                                       March 1997
Category: Best Current Practice

Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels

Status of this Memo

   This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
   Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Abstract

   In many standards track documents several words are used to signify
   the requirements in the specification.  These words are often
   capitalized.  This document defines these words as they should be
   interpreted in IETF documents.  Authors who follow these guidelines
   should incorporate this phrase near the beginning of their document:

      The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
      NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and
      "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
      RFC 2119<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119>.

   Note that the force of these words is modified by the requirement
   level of the document in which they are used.

1<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-1>. MUST
 This word, or the terms "REQUIRED" or "SHALL", mean that the
   definition is an absolute requirement of the specification.

2<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-2>. MUST NOT
 This phrase, or the phrase "SHALL NOT", mean that the
   definition is an absolute prohibition of the specification.

3<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-3>. SHOULD
 This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
   may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
   particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
   carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

4<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-4>. SHOULD NOT
 This phrase, or the phrase "NOT RECOMMENDED" mean that
   there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the
   particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full
   implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed
   before implementing any behavior described with this label.

Bradner                  Best Current Practice                  [Page 1]
________________________________

RFC 2119<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119>                     RFC Key Words                    March 1997

5<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-5>. MAY
 This word, or the adjective "OPTIONAL", mean that an item is
   truly optional.  One vendor may choose to include the item because a
   particular marketplace requires it or because the vendor feels that
   it enhances the product while another vendor may omit the same item.
   An implementation which does not include a particular option MUST be
   prepared to interoperate with another implementation which does
   include the option, though perhaps with reduced functionality. In the
   same vein an implementation which does include a particular option
   MUST be prepared to interoperate with another implementation which
   does not include the option (except, of course, for the feature the
   option provides.)

6<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-6>. Guidance in the use of these Imperatives

   Imperatives of the type defined in this memo must be used with care
   and sparingly.  In particular, they MUST only be used where it is
   actually required for interoperation or to limit behavior which has
   potential for causing harm (e.g., limiting retransmisssions)  For
   example, they must not be used to try to impose a particular method
   on implementors where the method is not required for
   interoperability.

7<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-7>. Security Considerations

   These terms are frequently used to specify behavior with security
   implications.  The effects on security of not implementing a MUST or
   SHOULD, or doing something the specification says MUST NOT or SHOULD
   NOT be done may be very subtle. Document authors should take the time
   to elaborate the security implications of not following
   recommendations or requirements as most implementors will not have
   had the benefit of the experience and discussion that produced the
   specification.

8<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119#section-8>. Acknowledgments

   The definitions of these terms are an amalgam of definitions taken
   from a number of RFCs.  In addition, suggestions have been
   incorporated from a number of people including Robert Ullmann, Thomas
   Narten, Neal McBurnett, and Robert Elz.

Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
_____________________________
[cid:image005.png at 01D6335A.65FB2780]
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/>
[cid:image006.jpg at 01D6335A.65FB2780]
Because what matters
to you, matters to us.(tm)

________________________________

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
________________________________
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200526/076930c5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 70 bytes
Desc: image004.gif
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200526/076930c5/image004-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6527 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200526/076930c5/image005-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2461 bytes
Desc: image006.jpg
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200526/076930c5/image006-0001.jpg>