[ntp:questions] Re: server's address in ntp payload?
mayer at ntp.isc.org
Mon Nov 28 04:16:28 UTC 2005
David Schwartz wrote:
> "Danny Mayer" <mayer at ntp.isc.org> wrote in message
> news:4389127A.2030900 at ntp.isc.org...
>>Then you don't understand the paragraph you just quoted. SHOULD is a
>>recommendation and not a requirement. You cannot violate a
>>recommendation. You used the word "must" which is not in the section you
> If you simply ignore a SHOULD and don't do what it says by default
> without an evaluation of the consequences, you are ignoring the RFC. The
> definition of "compliance" prohibits ignoring SHOULDs, though it does not
> require you to do what the SHOULD says. Not complying with a SHOULD because
> it requires effort or the API requires an extra bind to do it or the like is
> not compliant.
You are making the assumption that the consequences were not evaluated.
As I said before, even if you do, it does not violate the RFC since a
SHOULD is not required in any implementation. The fact that we DO
implement it renders the question moot.
More information about the questions