Return-Path: 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 B9CDF21F895F for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:54:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.776 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.255, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FRT_ADOBE2=2.455, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, 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 SdBeW-W-GUzf for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22A9421F895E for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbtb4 with SMTP id tb4so1235417obb.31 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=KaJEWzSzhhEAnDAy7DKiBTlOxDH1y9SK+VHK9hP6shw=; b=QGyOlZCWEwTh5bUTanj8en/zig4OyphXHigcmAz0+hfz04w56sqs0JLCOvoxicRA1W aTkrwZ35dWz5oAzxtIAX7Vz2N40PsIxGCt+iAjicIGU+xcBT6k5Cb52Adt+KwWiDBmVu eG6HH+46caXPGgMHEr4ZetPFheMIyxRPwgyCofUuadcV8lF8orweEvhwx91eK/ubJ4q3 xKNMzkAgvtrEQcYxLkhXy4pL1EuE5f3CZyqQlBkAMbq8OfHXg3uBMoSjC4ydBjbUTStk YKhSp+GwNSgpDMQK6fpqZ5IbjgqKPK8wW85draJzppyptVaDj+eL+kCK3y6jXWh6zDS8 WOUA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.154.7 with SMTP id vk7mr3078125obb.22.1332924865628; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.60.10.68 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <503575970.11554@cnnic.cn> <4A10020DB6464A0BBA535BF75D21A9D9@LENOVO47E041CF> <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E003928094CEB@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <4F6978D8.10605@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 04:54:25 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: yeY4TOOxPCXKxyFkCFjj5TgRWGU Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Larry Masinter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04479fdd20c8b904bc49c1b1 Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Use of RFC 2119, Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-about-uri-scheme-03.txt X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:54:27 -0000 --f46d04479fdd20c8b904bc49c1b1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wednesday, March 28, 2012, Larry Masinter wrote: > rfc4395 and http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-4395bis-irireg-04both use 2119 > keywords in the same way: Nevertheless, we've come to the decision to change it to lower-case words here. > Is a FCFS policy by itself consistent with having MUST and SHOULD requirements > on the registration? Sure; we're starting with FCFS (as in BCP 26), and then adding requirements. Perfectly fine. Barry --f46d04479fdd20c8b904bc49c1b1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wednesday, March 28, 2012, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:
> rfc4395 and http://too= ls.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-4395bis-irireg-04 both use 2119
> keywords in the same way:

Nevertheless, we've come to the d= ecision to change it to lower-case words here.

> Is a FCFS policy= by itself consistent with having MUST and SHOULD requirements
> on t= he registration?

Sure; we're starting with FCFS (as in BCP 26), and then adding requ= irements. =A0Perfectly fine.

Barry
--f46d04479fdd20c8b904bc49c1b1--