Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Registration request for EntityId, Isolation, OData-MaxVersion, and OData-Version

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 31 August 2018 23:48 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC782128CB7 for <ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 16:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=im5ztQAy; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=RRmwzV0i
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 vrk__VlEZB5F for <ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 16:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55F891286E3 for <ietf-message-headers@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 16:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B96E21F51; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 19:48:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 31 Aug 2018 19:48:48 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=oMZ1Z6SWDxvM2SPF4TYsA8fhT45Lh T45DNGo1eHKaMY=; b=im5ztQAyxERw98wRJkUO4a9P0cdZcLKnN+q4/lY2aHGqZ kXCrzs6Jv2hIQEM2lRR0bBd8i6YebQ+Q6iiQxaibb1sLkVmqT/Fi11RGTQQYhNT3 vGPi2aoqrRm756NHDyNW03kDTemefsjq0UmZfrph9lV+BOn5eWA1Yq98o07j9FSh 2JR4AgVk5Z5SSXpBM+3uiXFfquu9KnqmDPSpJFwcND50//4ysrzoEhmPOtaLg+iD 4XZzIlorrvlqkxUZWIFyeFPTzHd2LVaScLvkvE7QskLKyTt/pGokcQX1bhAzOKoC 68ogNPScMPj8tQPWbNkYnR4Txr1xRSXSEpyWYsFQQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=oMZ1Z6 SWDxvM2SPF4TYsA8fhT45LhT45DNGo1eHKaMY=; b=RRmwzV0iENedXGSIRmQV+3 YvH48HEB1hu1q5Yz7OLlPmxuApAcCGwBpB0ppyPbV+lLQsNu0ZN06/CvQdmXorbq oDFZNwPdjrSjd2FfNyFXXTSsKepa52zd3xMV3uJVohdkhZrpYXyuN8nXIlM3xvWV ggOAtem/+mIL0zSyQ9hfsGMYoXzXaqKRzdr5GBv3HgFGZxiuc5Wo24527yTQTWHP ZbZPb+1gC4qmqRT4V0ExwPYk5oUauJ9KKDlMB+ozh3r0gYsjeaLbqJ7qrx+Urdi5 cXdIb1bAaZZkYoU4/eb1Af5zUFbaLqucopJO0TxXuwFJcFXqurdmLkmx7on17epg ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:39OJW7_uHZfrg-MoF4v9nwnV_2Xt72MdrgAOKmAtc-mnN-e5ocUPKA> <xmx:39OJW343myrM00l6WGtpUXJ1PGJIU7GsYz9xEd1vDDtsehk5LlWGTA> <xmx:39OJW60d9Cu9Eena-twP1-92nEVA0oVcO3Et4SYtraKVXkqHPEEg2A> <xmx:39OJW2CO3FSnfHBox8xrNbtnquDNCnfHDT65-VOsRGTvpcmq6pUMsg> <xmx:39OJW03K6mfNhbFIWwk0EpOQJnCi5bjA1LyF9gspbNlmN9rdHGDLRg> <xmx:4NOJW40l52a76S0HRU1Q-QXMq-ySJ1Ar7-XpjeaK-5eA3xnDMj6sjQ>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:39OJWzq_RoO5TKlok-_OUXRp0wCGVFSzvl0JGuAVStRlgfZPnY9Usw>
Received: from attitudadjuster.mnot.net (unknown [144.136.175.28]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 529BB10297; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 19:48:46 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMAyiJvNDprx5AhjFTW9BkHy5D0vjhgVjuJzQwSC+kyujg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 09:48:43 +1000
Cc: Mark Biamonte <Mark.Biamonte@progress.com>, "ietf-message-headers@ietf.org" <ietf-message-headers@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7C3260F5-FE8D-43A7-8866-2299D60AE5C6@mnot.net>
References: <CAAwgnnOSdnKMDBZFq2BzazP6eKsPpAeuEmN6qstTCFQ8nQ=1+A@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMC7itwTqKEfKn=U_aM2TKTkwN+Bzp6E1aj47gp9S66YrQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAwgnnPh9dKaadxMiOzm=ZV2N_i5WrhD3unVBJ8jVSriLNq8MA@mail.gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB42420B1185F9CC9508B50432840F0@BN7PR05MB4242.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CA+9kkMAyiJvNDprx5AhjFTW9BkHy5D0vjhgVjuJzQwSC+kyujg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-message-headers/AEFnhWCKAXwL-xawPYe_IKB0dg8>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Registration request for EntityId, Isolation, OData-MaxVersion, and OData-Version
X-BeenThere: ietf-message-headers@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for header fields used in Internet messaging applications." <ietf-message-headers.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-message-headers>, <mailto:ietf-message-headers-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-message-headers/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-message-headers@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-message-headers-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers>, <mailto:ietf-message-headers-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 23:48:52 -0000


> On 1 Sep 2018, at 2:54 am, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> This change was made based on feedback for users and implementors of the OData standard.  I gather your preference would be that we use the OData-prefixed version for the registrations.  If so I will need to discuss that with the TC and get back to you.
> 
> 
> While that would be my personal preference, it is simply that:  my opinion as an individual.  I'm primarily concerned that other, unregistered or pre-registration uses of these more general concepts may occur.  While recording them in the registry will help avoid collisions, there is always some risk and the more general the term, the higher the risk.
> 

Speaking personally, I'd second that concern. It's least confusing when headers that are specific to an application (in this case, OData) include that application's name in their field name. 

Cheers,



--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/