SLPF: Ambiguity in the meaning of the word 'Required'

["Brule, Joseph M" <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil>]

All, 

There were multiple comments regarding the word 'required'.  In the context of the SLPF tables, the word 'Required' was supposed to mean that products must implement the command, option, specifier etc.  The word 'Optional' was supposed to mean that the command, option, specifier or whatever is meaningful to a stateless packet filter, and a vendor MAY implement it, but if they do not, the product is still OpenC2 compatible.  

This lead to confusion.  Some readers interpreted the word required as 'MUST be in every command'.  

Here is a suggested resolution:  

Current table headers and entries are some variant of : 

OPTION		REQUIRED/OPTIONAL		DESCRIPTION
Response	required			Indicates the type of response... 

Proposed change
OPTION		IMPLEMENTATION		DESCRIPTION
Response	required			indicates the type of...

If we change the heading to implementation and the entry to either required or optional, then the reader should be able to discern that they have to implement it, but just because it is implemented does not mean they have to use it in each and every command.  

Is this clear, and if not can you provide alternate text? 

Thank you 

VR

Joe Brule