IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-liman-tld-names-04

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Sat, 27 November 2010 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC1428C0DB for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 10:01:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.203
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dYk8TmracKvG for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 10:01:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.151]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DE8B28C0D7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 10:01:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from [87.114.255.201] (port=60734 helo=[192.168.0.4]) by ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.158]:587) with esmtpsa (PLAIN:fanf2) (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) id 1PMP6u-00051d-Xo (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Sat, 27 Nov 2010 18:02:57 +0000
References: <20101117091928.GA30093@nic.fr> <4CE9E942.20906@dougbarton.us> <0E561274-43FE-4657-951E-74C8FF0FD307@hopcount.ca> <4CEC43DC.1060709@dougbarton.us> <E7796748-6880-4928-B96D-0024E27E98D5@hopcount.ca> <4CEC69C5.3040209@dougbarton.us> <7B9EF625-1E25-42BE-9546-61C5B7EFC6DA@hopcount.ca> <8CEF048B9EC83748B1517DC64EA130FB43E0037FD1@off-win2003-01.ausregistrygroup.local> <20101124142303.GB19441@shinkuro.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1011251734170.4075@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20101125175247.GH21047@shinkuro.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1011261558520.4075@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <D8E75C03-0322-4594-BB27-D825AB429EA6@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <D8E75C03-0322-4594-BB27-D825AB429EA6@hopcount.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8B117)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-1--958864999"
Message-Id: <C4FB358F-53D1-4A2B-A3A4-1C07222C0B51@dotat.at>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (8B117)
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 18:02:23 +0000
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-liman-tld-names-04
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 18:01:58 -0000

On 27 Nov 2010, at 15:57, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote:
> 
> I don't know how to defend an assertion in absolute terms that this understanding is categorically wrong. How would you do it?

As I have said before, RFC 1123 is very clear that DISCUSSION sections are for clarification and explanation. They do not impose requirements that do not exist in the normative sections.

 Under many of the individual topics in this document,
 there is parenthetical material labeled "DISCUSSION"
 or "IMPLEMENTATION".  This material is intended to give
 clarification and explanation of the preceding requirements
 text.  It also includes some suggestions on possible future
 directions or developments.

Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email