IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [art] On BCP 190

Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> Tue, 23 July 2019 21:24 UTC

Return-Path: <leifj@mnt.se>
X-Original-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A205B1202DF for <art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 14:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnt-se.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kZdUZszRbD6t for <art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 14:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82d.google.com (mail-qt1-x82d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EC2E1202C3 for <art@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 14:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82d.google.com with SMTP id w17so43322939qto.10 for <art@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 14:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnt-se.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=NQL0alrZDzUEmxo3XUSB6qXdK45Jk7bSx8Cb1WbECKs=; b=P5gCowk4xsVChhTAqwazQIFGj/nqo2znBOh51H3uv76QT1ZK+HoUTbYtc2LUg3Q2yw kie6bQHbfmrj1zzPfMrNfZj7Jc9wToVnCTQdUyVewekF/m0LqgKnZrfDN+/9APRIkfXH Mui1C2lOQcQ+oVRkpT2lSzumvKflBCznDADBllnjgmViRYIHJWRGw0WZSjQZExCVhfCO i3OTDPWed8ZLsGK+DCL581sIAbKsUjpQKSINwTxj2ujhbqOzKfmepKNvwXDqO6Z8bDeQ iw0jqecCHJFw5gEUjjlhwTjXx7pwORZOZNABD3f+XuL/CRG/Ody1iR7aJnBWtsaIZEUs bA7w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=NQL0alrZDzUEmxo3XUSB6qXdK45Jk7bSx8Cb1WbECKs=; b=XH57epQAUIj1Xqfaq/Tf+qJjXmGUyNloyt2ww+JTc3zVJ7j8Q5mQeLSZposaimKbY9 3CqTYOij4GsMDNm4K5dvkzx0ebK1DDztlCU53AZEkroGVFsYUE4RZtPsvgNAW4Vu4z5j 1iJG8pxYU6Le+L3p+DaV3MVwmd7cFBtRteCGC3NV7T4f1sf64LBOJ9gZUwMXIJydyc+V mKRWRttPrByCmuTl7h+9CRxEGIhP5bQI9sJJwL605Rit0KfVueRawYA9TTFDPBrAU1st X5RDaKYxTuo08EQlM3PSAC2gyccw9BjX8zULatXMxW3nQFE/EgjXWBf83cXidPLKyxd2 65eQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVgiQKQkzG6aX0STjpAOXMATdcOjo8dTIwOiXq9IIm01W2A5asL man/FRNfQNolQVpLMcx87dnYv05z
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqweA+y+lN89mzRacSEXiLgivvBVYSApXW91MydJlXJjj3YojRG/yMjP5fIYPl7Zuwijoe953A==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4a10:: with SMTP id x16mr54522718qtq.282.1563917083160; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 14:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [31.133.147.51] (dhcp-9333.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.147.51]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c40sm27072880qtd.14.2019.07.23.14.24.42 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Jul 2019 14:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F203)
In-Reply-To: <42C8475A-6DFE-4DC6-B608-8159B90F9CDB@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:24:33 -0400
Cc: art@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <55E6A246-4D77-44DA-AF2B-AA9C42FACC2F@mnt.se>
References: <58BF6171-03BB-4F83-940F-3A101EFDD67F@mnot.net> <2ba63f8c-0f61-bd59-fbca-9d782a0d9818@mnt.se> <F81E44F7-7B51-4C68-9470-E94EFD2D4102@mnot.net> <e9780f61-681f-a5d9-7b06-549a2e652f5f@mnt.se> <42C8475A-6DFE-4DC6-B608-8159B90F9CDB@mnot.net>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/o6VaRK8bicc_gIuBbF8HeUDvZLA>
Subject: Re: [art] On BCP 190
X-BeenThere: art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications and Real-Time Area Discussion <art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/art>, <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/art/>
List-Post: <mailto:art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art>, <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 21:24:46 -0000


Skickat från min iPhone

> 23 juli 2019 kl. 16:34 skrev Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>:
> 
> Please re-read; it’s to prevent future problems. 

To me that is the definition of aspiration: you hope that you will alter behaviour in the future.

How do you measure success?

Cheers Leif

> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 23 Jul 2019, at 4:28 pm, Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2019-07-23 21:54, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 23 Jul 2019, at 3:34 pm, Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> In short, I'm not concerned about *this* IETF specification violating the BCP, I'm concerned when there are 1,000 specs that do so (which may not be that far away, given how many specs are being built on top of HTTP). 
>>>> 
>>>> Playing devils advocate: how is BCP190 then a BCP? I understand there
>>>> may be an argument for the B and the C but if there are really 1000s
>>>> of APIs that does what BCP190 say you MUST NOT, then in what sense
>>>> does this represent Best Current /Practice/?
>>> 
>>> There aren't; I was speaking about the future.
>> 
>> 
>> Ah so the BCP designation is aspirational? I personally think thats a
>> problematic use of BCPs
>> 
>>   Cheers Leif
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email