IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] [appsdir] Feedback on draft-moonesamy-rfc2369bis-01 and draft-moonesamy-rfc2919bis-01

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 18 January 2012 17:21 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 C6F7F21F84BD for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:21:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.622
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.622 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 TIOJ9MnCo-DQ for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:21:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2B2821F84C2 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:21:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.237.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0IHKdlq019229 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:21:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1326907275; i=@elandsys.com; bh=+JnJ+enxwPr4Fu4PMiS6c9wc0MYB24UnxMzVFfHFw6Q=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=AMEyGRsSISP9biWcG4mYrw4OwrNX1MZJdYFoAixmAQcD/RD2WMIUN6929WDKOOMvF TNfoPesAEw02WpuVi9LsqC1jNxxy1019J8PJDBMxW6rqTYa0psCj0xleO2PIgqTepz 0aVA8MghG+FTsPg4Ly850WkmMQOkEtBt9Vmz5o80=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1326907275; i=@elandsys.com; bh=+JnJ+enxwPr4Fu4PMiS6c9wc0MYB24UnxMzVFfHFw6Q=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=175vSzsKF+bCiDUEsB4kkaU+h719L2b5xkGvftpGbQp91S/9sO79HpJ1hiCFaBSJF HoYFyOSZYQln1nusLQdip/IWg/qgz5puSro56FHolJaoa68ZvoOcZtTMB6i3ETU7yg xAocAV4Lf33GK7glXtExSFjc6m0UkT/yW97N2lMs=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20120118080640.097bb400@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:16:15 -0800
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20120108011725.0bfaf2b8@resistor.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20120105165019.063fa0a8@resistor.net> <20120106063934.80082.qmail@joyce.lan> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C1578F@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120108011725.0bfaf2b8@resistor.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [appsdir] Feedback on draft-moonesamy-rfc2369bis-01 and draft-moonesamy-rfc2919bis-01
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: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:21:25 -0000

Hello,

I plan to submit draft-moonesamy-rfc2369bis-02 today.  The list of 
changes from -01 are:

    o  Added ABNF and reference to RFC 5234
    o  Removed text about postmaster in List-Owner Section
    o  Removed User Interface guidelines from Appendix B
    o  Removed SHOULD include a "mailto" based command in Section 3
    o  Modified the text to first paragraph of Section 3.1

Thanks to Mykyta Yevstifeye, Murray S. Kucherawy and John Levine for 
feedback.  I'll summarize the comments.  As usual, if I misunderstood 
anything you said, please email me.

I added "List-Sequence" in the Abstract Section as Mykyta suggested 
[1] and added the IANA registration.  I included the ABNF he 
suggested and some editorial changes (mailto).

Murray suggested [2] including ABNF.  As he commented on the language 
at the top of 3.1 sounding vaguely like a minimum compliance 
statement, I modified the text.  The suggestion to use "postmaster" 
in Section 3.5 of draft-moonesamy-rfc2369bis-01 has been 
removed.  The Client Implementation appendix has been removed as John 
Levine also commented on not providing UI guidance.  I have not added 
a reference to draft-gregorio-uritemplate (values expanded by MUA).

John Levine suggested [3] not providing MUA user interface design 
advice.  Appendix B has been removed.  I removed the text that 
sounded like the "the constant harping to use mailto:".  I kept 
Section 4 about Nested lists.

Murray also mentioned having some text in the Security Considerations 
Section to recommend that MUAs should not generate the header 
fields.  I didn't make that change as there is already a 
recommendation in the second paragraph of Section 3.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg04032.html
2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg04039.html
3. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/appsdir/current/msg00687.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email