Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-eggert-bcp45bis-01.txt

Lars Eggert <> Tue, 30 March 2021 13:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D8663A12BD for <>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bAQBvAyI9nWp for <>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 925533A12BC for <>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:1894:d982:c139:2ff9] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:1894:d982:c139:2ff9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B55A6600076; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:40:49 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=dkim; t=1617111649; bh=RKLbzdY1SY2iWUz/SubAgcswxQFGrd3rCe1DyxwKdY0=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=lgfLsaNz/7FLaqxFvjxJvTKnupggbyCllruiv7/+RuQ2fmn/uqjwrGYeYZyTz2VFO 4VwmthJ+J1TbbLLayJL9nbZJbo1mHzUK6JF7mnAYtL3O/WYDRbJHkvzzpIv67LaBrF u15RqcT6KC6T5ojpWig3X4sNYGd+dPIkQip1Cy4c=
From: Lars Eggert <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8F21E8BF-BC59-45BA-BCC5-EE0AB1AD70E8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:40:49 +0300
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: Eliot Lear <>, GENDISPATCH List <>
To: Eliot Lear <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.
X-MailScanner-ID: B55A6600076.AFCFC
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-eggert-bcp45bis-01.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:41:03 -0000


On 2021-3-30, at 16:20, Eliot Lear <> wrote:
>> On 30 Mar 2021, at 14:58, Lars Eggert <> wrote:
>> I'd prefer to do a minimal update to BCP45 soon, to bring its charter back in line with its current use.
>> We can always revise it again, when there is consensus on more fundamental changes.
> If we have to have consensus on changes, what is the point of dispatching at all?  We might as well just go right to RFC from here.

it isn't clear that we have consensus for the minimal update to BCP45 that I'm trying to propose. I'm using gendispatch to get some initial feedback.

>  You are setting the bar so high that we cannot even have the discussion.

I'm sorry if I was unclear. I'm not setting any bar or stopping any discussion. If participants want to make a case for more fundamentally revamping the list, or replacing it with some other discussion forum, that's completely fine by me.

But that discussion will likely take some time, whereas a minimal update to bring BCP45 into alignment with current practice need not be delayed by that discussion. And if that minimal update becomes obsolete at that point, that's fine, too.