IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis: PS or DS?

Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Mon, 05 September 2011 13:11 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 E127421F851A for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.419
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 wUxLRG1HK6jS for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19AE21F8B42 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.156] (adsl-68-122-69-114.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [68.122.69.114]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p85DD23u021378 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:13:07 -0700
Message-ID: <4E64CAD5.9010108@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 06:12:53 -0700
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.1) Gecko/20110830 Thunderbird/6.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <20110830041853.24036.37.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DFA7F@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <01O5KWP5WPAU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01O5KWP5WPAU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
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]); Mon, 05 Sep 2011 06:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis: PS or DS?
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: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 13:11:28 -0000

On 9/2/2011 2:01 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
>> The only material change is the removal of a constraint.  On the face of it,
>> >  it would seem that this doesn't disqualify it from remaining at DS.
> In general that's not true - removal of a constraint that would affect
> implementations generating the format in some way is something I would
> see as requiring a reset to proposed.


It might not be obvious why merely removing a restriction should be considered 
that risky.

An example that comes to mind is having a specification that calls for use of 
ASCII and then removing the 'restriction' on using the 8th bit, to permit 
support for UTF-8.

That would certainly kill interoperability between UTF-8 senders and ASCII 
(legacy) receivers.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email