IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call

"Clive D.W. Feather" <clive@demon.net> Mon, 24 September 2007 08:55 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 1IZjjH-0000D0-FF; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:55:47 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZjjG-00007W-Au for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:55:46 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZjjF-0008Oa-Tp for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:55:45 -0400
Received: from anchor-internal-1.mail.demon.net ([195.173.56.100]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZjj6-0000Ea-LJ for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 04:55:42 -0400
Received: from finch-staff-1.server.demon.net (finch-staff-1.server.demon.net [193.195.224.1]) by anchor-internal-1.mail.demon.net with ESMTP id l8O8tFtf005127Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:55:16 GMT
Received: from clive by finch-staff-1.server.demon.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1IZjil-000EK7-00; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:55:15 +0100
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:55:15 +0100
From: "Clive D.W. Feather" <clive@demon.net>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call
Message-ID: <20070924085515.GG47850@finch-staff-1.thus.net>
References: <9BF7C36E0E2900AA9252E3A5@p3.JCK.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9BF7C36E0E2900AA9252E3A5@p3.JCK.COM>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Cc: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, Dave Crocker <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

John C Klensin said:
> Although other possibilities would do equally well (and I have
> mixed feelings about the "syntax versus Security Considerations
> versus both" question), this change appears to me to be
> consistent with the conclusions reached last spring.  I think it
> is more important to accept some reasonable change, such as this
> one, get the document published, and move on than to engage in a
> further lengthy debate about just which solution would be best
> in some abstract sense.

+1 strongly.

> I would _strongly_ suggest one small change, which is that the
> word "valid" replace "legal" whenever the latter occurs.   We
> don't make laws around here.

+1 weakly.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive@demon.net>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive@davros.org>  | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
THUS plc            |                            |

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email