Re: Last Call: draft-resnick-2822upd (Internet Message Format) toDraft Standard

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 22 May 2008 02:22 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE2E3A6897; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BF43A6897 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.525
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 sz6bnAA0ZWLa for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.183]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69C593A688B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k34so3609671wah.25 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=y86mNDtqD68GYwkxAVC286BCO2aSaKvva5zihdZPicg=; b=H//okgtK0C+9XKd+TRbXUzJ4G5j/txByREzYBVRrjaI7iZ7MRfD73c+VT+Z8LdQq8BB3IOt8dQmJ8D9nS/8BmSk9Z6GL3SNRrCyDfcx3nksJW6z5CHAVKzHFToDmuFb5iWEVVHP8WwX5+vrmitWnYWFLaeULt6tc+89GV8dDs1Q=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=tYO0ZTCHWf1/c7EpCcMQVzkXU6d+wLCLIy7pQUalbCEmuwyR/uSuPMGfPEfoB82hYrYymlZRuD1f7A6vvfXoVYYA4omBPSkRLRM4Xt52nmuzrh77L2/PoX9395HMMdIy6nkawOXjL1BsCXY82u4g5f1ToF9ybhs6MRye0fw5Z/Y=
Received: by 10.114.157.1 with SMTP id f1mr11401467wae.214.1211422959038; Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?130.216.38.124? ( [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l36sm6972193waf.45.2008.05.21.19.22.35 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 21 May 2008 19:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4834D8E7.7070705@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 14:22:31 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-resnick-2822upd (Internet Message Format) toDraft Standard
References: <20080403231146.5F0853A683E@core3.amsl.com> <47F57508.3040107@gmail.com> <ft57m4$csu$1@ger.gmane.org> <8BB8410A1437A8973C333DCE@p3.JCK.COM> <p06250119c4201006af1b@[75.145.176.242]> <47FA692D.5030307@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <47FA692D.5030307@dcrocker.net>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Lisa,

Could you let us see your summary of the discussion about
(not) documenting the X-headers? I haven't seen any further
comments since Dave's message below, and it appears that the
IESG is ballotting on the document now.

Regards
   Brian

On 2008-04-08 06:34, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> Pete Resnick wrote:
>   >> (1) Partially restore the 822 text, stressing "private use", rather
>>> than "experiental".
>> I don't think we'll be able to do this; see (3) below.
> ...
>>> (3) Encourage X-headers for strictly private use, i.e., they SHOULD 
>>> NOT be used in any context in which interchange or communication 
>>> about independent systems is anticipated and therefore SHOULD NOT be 
>>> registered under 3683.
>> I think this is DOA. There are many folks (myself included) who think 
>> this should not be encouraged in any way, shape, or form.
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> One of the lessons of the community's 30+ years of protocol work is that 
> specification details which are actually usage guidance, rather than concrete 
> interoperability details, often have little impact on a global community.  The 
> community formulates its own preferences.
> 
> When X- as original proposed, I thought it was marvelously clever.  I still do.
> 
> But it doesn't work.
> 
> While it does protect a privately-developed header field label from being 
> preempted by a standards process, it creates a much more serious problem of 
> moving from private-use to public standards and having to (try to) re-label the 
> field.  This is a highly disruptive impact./
> 
> In other words, if the model is true that existing practices get standardized -- 
> and in this realm they often are, I think -- then we need to design things to 
> make the transition from private-to-public be comfortable.  Defining a 
> private-use naming space runs counter to that goal.
> 
> Valuable lesson.  We should learn it.
> 
> d/
> 
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf