Re: New Version Notification for draft-leiba-rfc2119-update-00.txt

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Wed, 10 August 2016 02:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5198912D0B5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 19:26:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.148
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 hOPeFvxwmN_G for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 19:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EFF312D0A1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 19:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EB32009E; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 22:36:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F06D638BE; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 22:26:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-leiba-rfc2119-update-00.txt
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLHx7ytgZqZ9zQXA3vVSU-pNggQQs+QiDnzQ4tBEH5VAQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <147077254472.30640.13738163813175851232.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALaySJLHx7ytgZqZ9zQXA3vVSU-pNggQQs+QiDnzQ4tBEH5VAQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <15074.1470795966.1@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 22:26:06 -0400
Message-ID: <15076.1470795966@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/36mzq2GSLCVOFTnc6CQLpmKSe-s>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:26:08 -0000

re: section 1.1:

So as I understand it, documents which adhere to rfc2119-update will
cite BCP14 and the RFCXXXX which this document will have?
or will it cite RFC2119 and RFCXXXX?

Are you suggesting that we should be citing BCP14 though?

It seems that retaining section 1.1 might be worth it.

XML format and screen readers.

I have not looked deeply into the final RFC-format XML spec.
Does it already markup SHOULD/MUST/MAY in some useful way?
Could it?  If it does, should this document point out this?

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [