IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cellar] normative references

Moritz Bunkus <mo@bunkus.online> Mon, 26 September 2022 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <mo@bunkus.online>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E51C14CE23 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 11:34:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.111
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=0.001, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.997, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=bunkus.online
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22zDVKYIceiC for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 11:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from liselle.bunkus.org (liselle.bunkus.org [142.132.213.39]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFDFAC14F72D for <cellar@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 11:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sweet-chili.int.bunkus.org (sweet-chili.int.bunkus.org [IPv6:2003:a:f28:de01::4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: email-relay) by liselle.bunkus.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D5FF1080D77 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:34:29 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bunkus.online; s=dkim; t=1664217269; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=R2b+sud2kADDaHysNgAefKG+O2kTJlwlO4/xbu0jI/I=; b=XM5rvbShoaVOCPvnxSBuCkkclZFZpAtu6UyRMUOmLoZYK/m+C5XYW8YstmlSGd/9khHYUt qYuXcOb4OEMFTbG0wOfZoUJKRKYZy7t+AfGHCo4mey84+8uJJ+jbFsOxDkDzkMUrKtNqPT PMRuqgQ6B0BPbUWx9GDlmLnPfjT3Ffc=
Received: from sweet-chili (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sweet-chili.int.bunkus.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32CBA2F3A2FE for <cellar@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:34:27 +0200 (CEST)
References: <153671.1664216229@dooku> <154091.1664216436@dooku>
User-agent: mu4e 1.8.9; emacs 28.2
From: Moritz Bunkus <mo@bunkus.online>
To: cellar@ietf.org
Cc:
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:30:15 +0200
In-reply-to: <154091.1664216436@dooku>
Message-ID: <87a66m2de4.fsf@bunkus.online>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/YOSRw-Z0W27Pv7uX6nNJaF345E0>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] normative references
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 18:34:39 -0000

Hey,

thinking transitively here: we need BCP 47 as a normative reference, and
BCP 47 has ISO3166-1 as a normative reference. Would it really make a
difference for us to make our ISO3166-1 reference informative?

Kind regards,
mosu

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email