Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in Various Protocol Specifications) to Proposed Standard
"Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com> Wed, 21 January 2009 22:12 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 3CFB03A68B6; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:12:20 -0800 (PST)
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 C169C3A68DA for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:12:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.183
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.183 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.416, 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 jWwMylI5u3vB for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:12:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mk-outboundfilter-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-outboundfilter-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE373A6778 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:12:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Trace: 179619982/mk-outboundfilter-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com/PIPEX/$PIPEX-ACCEPTED/pipex-customers/62.188.105.232/None/sisyphus@dial.pipex.com
X-SBRS: None
X-RemoteIP: 62.188.105.232
X-IP-MAIL-FROM: sisyphus@dial.pipex.com
X-MUA: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-IP-BHB: Once
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArwEAJbhdkk+vGno/2dsb2JhbACDRD+JWMAVBoVt
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,302,1231113600"; d="scan'208";a="179619982"
X-IP-Direction: IN
Received: from 1cust232.tnt2.lnd9.gbr.da.uu.net (HELO allison) ([62.188.105.232]) by smtp.pipex.tiscali.co.uk with SMTP; 21 Jan 2009 22:11:56 +0000
Message-ID: <001501c97c0c$d0573e00$0601a8c0@allison>
From: "Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20090106185628.80FBE3A67EA@core3.amsl.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in Various Protocol Specifications) to Proposed Standard
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:10:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com>
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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 A) The start of this I-D seems a little coy - 'various protocol specifications'
'several protocols' - and this is reflected in the Abstract and Introduction. Reading between the lines, this seems to have had its genesis in the 'Sub-IP Area' specification; nothing wrong with that, but the coyness seems misplaced. More generally, I think that this I-D cries out for an Applicability Statement. It makes brief reference to RFC5234 but contains no guidance that I can see as to when this standard should be used or when RFC5234 should be. The IETF has a history of producing multiple standards and letting the market decide but I think that we do a better job when we give guidance. B) Coyness again, in its definitions 'The basic building blocks of BNF are rules and operators' but what is a rule? RFC5234 eg says "A rule is defined by the following sequence: name = elements crlf" and I think that something similar is needed here (or else make RFC5234 a normative reference:-) C) In a similar vein, to me, and perhaps to many in the IETF, it is RFC5234 or its precursors that represent the 'standard' meta-syntactic language. Some comparison of the functionality would be helpful, as an informative Appendix. Is this a proper subset, if not, then where? D) As s.2.4 says. 'Precedence is the main opportunity for confusion in the use of BNF.' I think this should go further. The underlying reason IMO is because the concatenation mechanism, the one with no operator, takes precedence over the alternative operator, and this is counter-intuitive. RFC5234 spells this out ' Use of the alternative operator, freely mixed with concatenations, can be confusing.' and, IPR permitting (I note that this was submitted pre-5378 but any revision would not be:-), I suggest incorporating such text. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "The IESG" <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> To: "IETF-Announce" <ietf-announce@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 7:56 PM Subject: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in Various Protocol Specifications) to Proposed Standard > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider > the following document: > > - 'Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in Various Protocol > Specifications ' > <draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf-07.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2009-02-03. Exceptionally, > comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please > retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > The file can be obtained via > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf-07.txt > > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=17681&rf c_flag=0 > > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Tom.Petch
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Adrian Farrel
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Adrian Farrel
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Adrian Farrel
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Tom.Petch
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Tony Hansen
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduc… Adrian Farrel