Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Fri, 18 May 2007 14:59 UTC

Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp3vv-0004eT-3k; Fri, 18 May 2007 10:59:55 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp3vt-0004eI-Ma for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 10:59:53 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp3vt-0004e5-CE for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 10:59:53 -0400
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org ([69.25.196.178]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp3vs-0002wn-3r for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 10:59:53 -0400
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 74AFC400F; Fri, 18 May 2007 10:59:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
To: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call
References: <BFE21101-5BC4-45FA-8905-89C2D4A1E593@osafoundation.org> <4648E8CB.3010502@dcrocker.net> <F5C06D62-639B-40CB-803F-6D9E50673768@osafoundation.org> <4649FA12.30909@alvestrand.no> <4649FB9A.9000107@bbiw.net> <1504A69099CF1B62F66FE576@p3.JCK.COM> <tsllkfnwgfb.fsf@mit.edu> <464C8822.7020503@dcrocker.net> <tsl4pmbrw0z.fsf@mit.edu> <464CC8D3.2000700@dcrocker.net> <tslejlfnnef.fsf@mit.edu> <464D02EF.6070607@cs.utk.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:59:51 -0400
In-Reply-To: <464D02EF.6070607@cs.utk.edu> (Keith Moore's message of "Thu, 17 May 2007 21:35:43 -0400")
Message-ID: <tsl7ir6i3dk.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org, Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, IETF General Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, dcrocker@bbiw.net, Paul Overell <paul.overell@thus.net>
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols <discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org

>>>>> "Keith" == Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> writes:

    Keith> it could be argued that the best thing to do is to remove
    Keith> ALL of the rules from the ABNF spec, leaving only the
    Keith> language definition and examples.  (actually I think I did
    Keith> argue this sometime around 1996, but I'm too lazy to search
    Keith> through old email to find it.  

I think this would be too big of a change going from draft to full
given our experience.  If we had huge tracts of problems with the
rules, it might be a different situation.