IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] WGLC on draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-02.txt

Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Tue, 31 January 2012 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 E592021F85B5 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:42:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vl03FJRMLVGN for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:42:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34D1321F84D8 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:42:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.26] (mail.pir.org [72.44.190.134]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0VGg85E011508 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:42:16 -0800
Message-ID: <4F2819DD.8060008@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:42:05 -0500
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
References: <002501ccdf64$8db56220$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <002501ccdf64$8db56220$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 31 Jan 2012 08:42:17 -0800 (PST)
Cc: apps-discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] WGLC on draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-02.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:42:20 -0000

wfm.

d/

On 1/30/2012 10:33 AM, t.petch wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave CROCKER"<dhc@dcrocker.net>
> To: "t.petch"<ietfc@btconnect.com>
> Cc:<apps-discuss@ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 6:33 PM
>> On 1/27/2012 8:08 AM, t.petch wrote:
>> I do not see it in the I-D, about what, if anything, this I-D expects to
> change
>> with the parameters currently in use.
>>
>> If you think that's a problem, please explain why and offer some text to cover
> it.
>
> Add at the end of the Introduction paragraph 2
> 'This document makes no recommendation as to whether existing X- parameters
> should continue to be used or should be migrated to a format without the X-."
>
> because otherwise this obvious question is left in midair.
>
> Tom Petch
>>
>> d/
>> --
>>
>> Dave Crocker
>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>> bbiw.net
>>
>>
>> .
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email