Re: [Extra] BCP 178/X- convention (was AD Review of draft-ietf-extra-imap4rev2)

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 05 January 2021 00:39 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E963A0C0E for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 16:39:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=gmail.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 hh0w6w8C-ZgQ for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 16:39:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua1-x929.google.com (mail-ua1-x929.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::929]) (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 E55FC3A0C0D for <extra@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 16:39:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua1-x929.google.com with SMTP id 17so9722335uaq.4 for <extra@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 16:39:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a78jupA4ihRjw1udaMQgEJl8yymPkHZkcGZ3mfPEIyk=; b=Oa+zVrYTpUlLko5hVPT2/GHJbD5fjZCgCSzfkjM2YD3alXz5mMH1mpae1PDNxppTII StGotM7sdGIzye9jGwoLbqUGWLW+J+WYE6KZVw1vp95uXVoCXM2cDhp/hPP5dMs1k3R4 17nQwhhmoKBB05F0gO+F+33fha5dQbTf9qpA87YTAk5TaoVhbA2mf1AOWCy58YWeXp4/ tShPeMvTgis+6lzeY/teZvCxVLyhycE/Qt0RxjN17S3VvoLIJKcFGVHMtY03QKJuWtRV bgY93C8gAfOPW/pAG5Fbhz/5mwor5lUAycCgxIGxtpEmFvekLCcZ/BfpW/MuEe11+ZYe s/+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a78jupA4ihRjw1udaMQgEJl8yymPkHZkcGZ3mfPEIyk=; b=taIrYPZnaJ7OQQNA0bTEUKSUmDHhvSQAhhAl40fjTraAsngkK+8wQAyAa+fjQIDL24 ljSyW0VH3kgw4emCOYcmq0cIorSJ77272KWLU2e1pLkkxVkVUjJ37yRoo0jOESTEWD9X Cj7U0BwphJw1J8UER+dAmxrjLwwN+9+JRy9Ar0NF8LP9u/dFMOeKij5wauspmyHDE10D EJGMpFseMiqlZbjQ/5SNxfhXhXdGwgps4KCOjJ6VFzjY+hR9a3KffQcrUQW208Rg3+Zz 2sftEOTLU8XgJxiqI0pJtXu1BWhEEnPFFyhm2Ubp54TQ6uT8a0f0zm6KBVL2CFVZV92n 0pLA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530G9iaJw2BNZmaRqnVkFtMOkpG7I1FrHfM3QphGTofiAdvKK9BH NwteKRtHnhyyk3toghcU0CpF7IO88coULM56h0U=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGaj9AFDsAO7h1rqPSlCYjxCUJquDzg6UcEkpOUNqLDvllgRlyc+wRd9szeDxd5Os/bn0ReIaUhN0HAF9EkSM=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:614d:: with SMTP id w13mr23755343uan.67.1609807158706; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 16:39:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAL0qLwaLa+PuGWRrKTbpmDa_SWKT9ZQUEQ9dsPgXfUmTzcYAYw@mail.gmail.com> <82bda3f6-4629-42ea-bfa5-94551b7a721f@isode.com> <CALaySJ+pZNBfc9D3Auh+Z2XF6T7p5JzBfNtUTH45YBCNQrE5rg@mail.gmail.com> <d8fd9618-7f29-417b-0255-3c677c3f69f8@linuxmagic.com>
In-Reply-To: <d8fd9618-7f29-417b-0255-3c677c3f69f8@linuxmagic.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 16:39:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwaroU-vQLu5F5O3z61jiOAtsCEQp-pohDM4L=5duRCvEw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Peddemors <michael@linuxmagic.com>
Cc: extra@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000da07a005b81c6f38"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/3X71t-IfcNuoO0udjFso5_xu0II>
Subject: Re: [Extra] BCP 178/X- convention (was AD Review of draft-ietf-extra-imap4rev2)
X-BeenThere: extra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise or Amend <extra.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/extra/>
List-Post: <mailto:extra@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2021 00:39:21 -0000

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 12:59 PM Michael Peddemors <michael@linuxmagic.com>
wrote:

> Lets' talk some real world examples, and what the consensus is..
>
> X-Archive
> X-Attachment-Id
> X-Auth-ID
> X-Authority-Analysis
> X-Auto-Response-Suppress
> [...]
>

BCP 178 discourages standards track documents from establishing practices
where an "X-" prefix means "experimental", because in reality once that
name is out there, it never changes.  Indeed, as you point out, they're
unlikely to change anytime soon, so this document shouldn't make the
problem worse.

The point I'm making in this comment is that this document shouldn't do
that with capability names.  Barry's correct that the ones starting with
"X" in examples are just examples and don't violate the BCP; I agree, but
there's enough similarity to that deprecated practice that I suggest
(though less urgently) avoiding it in those cases as well.

-MSK