IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Fuzzy words [was Uppercase question for RFC2119 words]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 29 March 2016 23:56 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 A514012DB51; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:56:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 mTEnIENZTRgK; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:56:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x230.google.com (mail-pa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::230]) (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 B3D9E12D0E6; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:46:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-x230.google.com with SMTP id td3so25390124pab.2; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:46:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KkXCqfMdH95vDU4n+XqG5hdIfNAgjL5VDZrcZQAvVZQ=; b=vyejxbiJ+7li4Xcv6NXPCcqnfInMMUXHL2T9ZG69uBSDWaNWc0vUckIIQDgtUG1Hex jUTIgctoJl3TXyuJEYAcHT4W+Jsy22YZmZh67VrdVjIz9lcEl+VJpYgYqsuOANBSZ6Ku mhAmENJfbDbvieu+rKMVtUa5nB9+/PY5zB8heL6or9DgVAdUJN1CBK5whXLg3G2B+XnF q8HhjA5KkuEGxLzQ+W7tH5SUFlW8Xeo4nep+XZ7MZFOOWG4RdANJYHk4shGp4AX2bcii IAWYnW2VvEMEK03WZLYgWrQOlRYZXxVeFCXjPLjJvcW1gdn+z/nzaNNaAVu0j2Yet1/A o+eg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=KkXCqfMdH95vDU4n+XqG5hdIfNAgjL5VDZrcZQAvVZQ=; b=OO7GIZkItZJaxuVGGQU2tbRZmUJOtGdvVAhuF0W4tzaJQghPh+kVbrHqxNQfS0wv9H +IROYCPzKS6ia5NK/7prV+w3egkeqA6h31lvA5PaLmAf+/8azm7wDJ6nTuyOUdQGqvxu HE+MSkX123au0Xij1BhtDp5jHLa5EnDdALjp1A+t438t3Gpv/Cn+BQsWjPyUiksmjEY2 k34ldzgkNlsFIk13cDNJXQECysY+D8RDcx9Q1veDyjt8M+CiE2oLiQo6WhQUqETBmmW1 gDFBdPwJ1SOjkX0nIXwIvJ2K/pOATXK3DFJEbXrJDuZWCs1bTM2Js64Sj8tQzuLpmXF/ sQFg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIQzfHtPuTs0YvMSaW9naVMLlcYu9Dv0zFDse22Kw46kZjoXxTsvZwQvXW6mA7lig==
X-Received: by 10.66.237.173 with SMTP id vd13mr7871695pac.24.1459295212364; Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:46:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:df0:0:2006:c0da:ac17:5f6d:8e76? ([2001:df0:0:2006:c0da:ac17:5f6d:8e76]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b11sm898342pfj.4.2016.03.29.16.46.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Fuzzy words [was Uppercase question for RFC2119 words]
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <20160320223116.8946.76840.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADEAFFC7@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CA+9kkMCsT43ZCSdq8gdKXu1k4pJgbf0ab5tE=dDiFfrTT2gtkA@mail.gmail.c om> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADEB0D16@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <56F79D05.8070004@alvestrand.no> <326E6502-28E5-4D09-BB99-4A5D80625EB0@stewe.org> <56F88E18.2060506@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <20160328104731.GO88304@verdi> <CALaySJ+hYMMsKE7Ws-NJbyqH55E-mQM-duTEcJGc0TWvTP88Ew@mail.gmail.com> <20160328132859.GP88304@verdi> <28975138-9EA1-4A9F-A6C0-BC1416B8EA44@sobco.com> <CALaySJJkNj2jfm0gJpuDzq8oFDjTNn-uQ5MHdmEOLwTiFZUyQQ@mail.gmail.com> <8975F15F-5C4C-4D02-98CD-BF4FDF104D35@sobco.com> <56F98CD1.10706@gmail.com> <53A70D39871BEF8B0AE78195@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <56FB13EB.1040809@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 12:46:51 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <53A70D39871BEF8B0AE78195@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/60B9zAKf0iRKEg38Pwa_gKj6kTo>
Cc: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org>, rtcweb@ietf.org, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, IESG <iesg@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, 29 Mar 2016 23:56:47 -0000

On 30/03/2016 05:34, John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 08:58 +1300 Brian E Carpenter
> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> ...
>> The other words (must, shall, required, not) mean what they
>> always mean. The only argument for upper-casing them is
>> aesthetic symmetry. If a spec uses alternatives like
>> mandatory, necessary or forbidden, they are just as powerful.
>> ...
> 
> Actually, when 2119 is referenced, Section 6 attaches particular
> interoperability semantics to MUST, SHALL, etc., that are not
> part of the plain-English meaning of those words.  Section 6
> seems to be ignored most of the time but cited when it supports
> an axe someone wants to grind about use of conformance language.

My claim is that even section 6 does *not* change the meanings
of the categorical words in a spec. If it says that something
must or must not happen, either the statement is redundant or
it is essential for interoperability, whether it's written
in upper case Courier New or in runes.

But it doesn't matter. It's the SHOULDs and MAYs that require
precision in their use.

      Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email