Crypographically Strong Software Distribution HOWTO

Donald E. Eastlake 3rd dee3 at torque.pothole.com
Mon Jul 2 22:12:13 EDT 2001


Things that follow the MUST and MUST NOTs should be guaranteed to
interoperate. Things which don't aren't.

Things the follow the MUST and MUST NOT can claim conformance to the
standard. Things which don't can't.

Donald

From:  Bram Cohen <bram at gawth.com>
Date:  Mon, 2 Jul 2001 15:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
To:  Jon Callas <jon at callas.org>
Cc:  Kent Crispin <kent at songbird.com>,
            Crypto List <cryptography at wasabisystems.com>
In-Reply-To:  <p05100306b7669679e6d6@[192.168.1.180]>
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107021501270.12015-100000 at ultra.gawth.com>

>On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Jon Callas wrote:
>
>> The answer is that you SHOULD (in IETF terms, see RFC 2119,
>> <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt> for a definition of MAY, SHOULD,
>> MUST, etc.)
>
>That document clarifies nothing, it might as well say the following -
>
>1. MUST   This word, or the terms "REQUIRED" or "SHALL", mean that the
>   anyone violating the definition is a BAD PERSON.
>
>3. SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that anyone
>   violating the definition might or might not be a BAD PERSON.
>
>...
>
>-Bram Cohen
>
>"Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent"
>                                        -- John Maynard Keynes



---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at wasabisystems.com




More information about the cryptography mailing list