IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: An observation on draft-leiba-rfc2119-update-01

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 07 February 2017 19:23 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
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 BD280129E25 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:23:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 u4qxUtQtjPTd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:23:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x234.google.com (mail-qk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 891FC129E1D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:23:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x234.google.com with SMTP id u25so98650693qki.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:23:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=lkXK9z6HBA/dhx/+2mxH0nCemU3Eiv4Pv8biqKSbNsE=; b=m8C2LSEDSGavowPk8/aAbJSDJQaDF08+kFrqKdttk48UQH4wMGdod2lFHAn9FmJfxP W905H0M0J2ojl2kpkKeY30mllRxRJVuP/0mIqbv995SiiQAXy5LXOpLVWdquNhqbvRB4 iHeOw42vmZbc4uJj+SS3o1Wf6qgdv8jdL/8TYMtQG5mv6fcvsS1ahGLgghICcHX4SjXL 2reP3QYjw5n2jzSHiHeV1xLOum3h152eMSrfbZcCj5aAik1Q/kFxTjFR4alykwNGl7r0 D//aGe4Is+SE8lvREpjN1LpTsbIJ2701tpQ4682hOviSbNjGnPVra+9AF1goUgxGLX7g wejQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lkXK9z6HBA/dhx/+2mxH0nCemU3Eiv4Pv8biqKSbNsE=; b=iWrETP8CYvQZwMqHEaYI6f2Y1ADHakRsN6MqZwhH7U2yGTlOHG5Funsz/d6Abeko+Q k7Oih4hm9WRNgTyc2Pc919R/2raNBaZQgwlKywFXfWyZZ7zQky++OT/kE96+2IhjAsW5 L8EifGQM6TQx/ID+PGNvnP9g8UfPC1nBHyVjZNkcawMK2b4hvcB+BVIyza+v5E74rtWS 8rFKGMICgCc7IkXgTNJYJBPEDbbFWaL5fa853Zkg8nzIGyty8YJ5Ubb+4kgjhDzAnnaj 13qgoKeO9ho3VhRnEcU21+YFUn6EHHFbmiSktQ5opJ0u7DSGypnxQSPbo4M0Tw+msGM0 /x3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mU59Fip5PxSFIAPrswIev8Wn8j81iAyu1Mve/w21AFxcFmbufEQhA9HsdoI2I4Eo//WMSN0KP/KF8DFg==
X-Received: by 10.55.181.6 with SMTP id e6mr15247566qkf.298.1486495420702; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:23:40 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.19.72 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:23:40 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <3a2f751d-aeb2-2705-9b27-bf95558eb835@gmail.com>
References: <d55a5027-b01a-8891-5e6e-4c519b5b9801@gmail.com> <CALaySJL-kfjQO=P3aVWwu6zEz6y5k7bngqEf0eqShWjAKAZ7Ug@mail.gmail.com> <3a2f751d-aeb2-2705-9b27-bf95558eb835@gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 11:23:40 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: PFoXICKzdrPwLyDXrCZnBreuoFk
Message-ID: <CALaySJJCN5o-U+CBYc0nVXiMVTHCdhy5GPJmpD7y_KPKPTTj1w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: An observation on draft-leiba-rfc2119-update-01
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/43fkPhbgt1XEBNiJhW6MdFBv5M0>
Cc: IETF Discussion <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: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 19:23:43 -0000

> Recommending that future documents cite [BCP14] would simplify life.
> The RFC Editor knows how to handle that.

I thought about that, but then there's the "publication date" problem
again: you'd have to look at what BCP 14 was at the time the document
you're reading was published.  That's why I've suggested using "BCP
14" in the text, but explicitly citing the two RFCs.  Looking for
strong clarity.

Of course, one could argue that the BCP 14 boilerplate text makes it
clear enough, so....

Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email