Re: [apps-discuss] draft-saintandre-xdash-considered-harmful

Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com> Fri, 03 June 2011 06:57 UTC

Return-Path: <evnikita2@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A24E070F for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 23:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.536
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.536 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.063, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A7Ll9dwhAQcr for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 23:57:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D09DE06E7 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 23:57:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm15 with SMTP id 15so1283513fxm.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Jun 2011 23:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=9NRo2iQwC+w9PU7k7ep0VKwNWEoopnEFhQm0E5Xv/XA=; b=eFsEzctOi5TkXA7r7FaRno4+q3aMUfQnIUwigpJ20SqhnEieH3DEs9qBx2KvvAFQ6r viKuA4P6jv9QTD0rLiFi8VEvoMslqupc3lGpTwGc4B+zFUjVXmBL5Q1OJl4lw0mFVffs MH6p9Z4KIObFAjsMW5R1HgIP4rkzJ10HQ8OGM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dZm3Yn4UBUZs1wL3S18SVG/F6/xc1TpGitYKcKNp2p9n9VoR8BbPzSlvgPtovq5pkX 5y9Wz5t6ia31gsLfmRT1zRo7SpoO7DD5bwGLnmTZ2etdJh3OmppjbaQC5luZApqyBylN 9DmaQCbubT6z6ElGsrRU/QqexWX+zO64AmW7s=
Received: by 10.223.68.193 with SMTP id w1mr650996fai.42.1307084258407; Thu, 02 Jun 2011 23:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([195.191.104.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b25sm401125fab.4.2011.06.02.23.57.36 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 02 Jun 2011 23:57:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4DE8860E.4070801@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 09:58:22 +0300
From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ru; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <321CAE57-EDC0-4DEE-801C-808FCBA36EF9@mnot.net> <4DE85364.6030900@stpeter.im> <C88E389F-57AD-4BEA-BCA5-94723BAF0380@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <C88E389F-57AD-4BEA-BCA5-94723BAF0380@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-saintandre-xdash-considered-harmful
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 06:57:40 -0000

03.06.2011 6:24, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> On 03/06/2011, at 1:22 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>
>> On 6/2/11 9:13 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-xdash-considered-harmful-01>
>>>
>>> Will this be progressing? I, for one, would like to see this as an BCP.
>> I'd be happy to bring it back to life
> Please do. Happy to help.
Maybe the document may be adopted as APPSAWG document; but the author 
should finally decide on this.
>
>> , although I admit that I've mostly
>> forgotten about it and that I haven't yet addressed some of the feedback
>> I received last year. Also, I think "harmful" might be a bit strong --
>> "considered-useless" perhaps?
Writing "considered harmful" RFCs is a current practice; see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/search/?name=harmful&rfcs=ons=on.  So I 
think having the title "X-" Considered Harmful is fine.

Mykyta Yevstifeyev
>
> Not *quite* strong enough. "considered bad practice?"
>
> Or just change the title to something more generic like "Appropriate use of X-".
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>