Re: [Idr] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-08: (with COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, May 22, 2017, at 04:05 PM, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 07:28:01AM -0700, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-08: No Objection
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > In Section 2:
> > 
> >    Shutdown Communication:  to support international characters, the
> >       Shutdown Communication field MUST be encoded using UTF-8.  A
> >       receiving BGP speaker MUST NOT interpret invalid UTF-8 sequences.
> >       Note that when the Shutdown Communication contains multibyte
> >       characters, the number of characters will be less than the length
> >       value.  This field is not NUL terminated.
> > 
> > I think you should stick a reference to RFC 5198, which talks about
> > subset of UTF-8 intended for human consumption.
> 
> Oh, that is a great reference! Thanks.
> 
> How about adding: """For interoperability and consistent text display,
> the Shutdown Communication field SHOULD be normalized as recommended in
> "Unicode Format for Network Interchange" [RFC5198]."""
> 
> Resulting in the following:
> 
> NEW:
> 
>     Shutdown Communication:  to support international characters, the
>         Shutdown Communication field MUST be encoded using UTF-8.  A
>         receiving BGP speaker MUST NOT interpret invalid UTF-8
>         sequences. For interoperability and consistent text display, the
>         Shutdown Communication field SHOULD be normalized as recommended
>         in "Unicode Format for Network Interchange" [RFC5198]. Note that
>         when the Shutdown Communication contains multibyte characters,
>         the number of characters will be less than the length value.
>         This field is not NUL terminated.

Works for me!

> > I was also thinking about language tagging (RFC 5646) for human
> > readable text, but I suspect that nobody will implement it in your
> > extension.
> 
> That would be extremely unlikely indeed.