Re: I'm struggling with 2219 language again

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 04 January 2013 08:02 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 386D321F8CE5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 00:02:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.691
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.691 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ov0PJpFlbqk9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 00:02:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B2C721F8CD6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 00:02:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id hn3so9060911wib.11 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:02:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RgACn09DSZkNh+KYaqK92yUryjt7LEF079fj+T9LEjE=; b=PVsSXVMn3YjeQqZn1gPM2ccmcjsFrXz+LQtugBGQrnc14PBtSf9rx6dmmuK+P8gZ23 nlT62NO5iWL1wdW/uXh7LOrZ+XhOCI+5aiq227RiYOFbSbvnFIGFlYDyUoESul76sAMP j1NHuIYQcR7IF2fUCuvFFDGE4HpJgr6+rH0aECrmgFhSR/R3cGPJARpqqJew07+jvdOl z3HDZILV1EkMI1+QHXavM7lWhNApvHmcV/zreTE2J5Wyf7SS6jF+hkNiwz126F2+yMFX 1ncv+WYLYdkfXnpWGA2HkPCjLjMm8JbFFLooLdMePaodBg5yHls+tF7aHjskAlVI9IJz wpGA==
X-Received: by 10.194.110.231 with SMTP id id7mr82361837wjb.6.1357286548522; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:02:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (host-2-102-219-29.as13285.net. [2.102.219.29]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bw9sm66221430wib.5.2013.01.04.00.02.27 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:02:27 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50E68CB5.4010107@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 08:03:01 +0000
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: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
Subject: Re: I'm struggling with 2219 language again
References: <7ED55FF1-3E1A-4DF7-918E-07790517B848@softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <7ED55FF1-3E1A-4DF7-918E-07790517B848@softarmor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 08:02:31 -0000

On 04/01/2013 05:15, Dean Willis wrote:
...
> Either way, I'd like to see some consensus. Because my head is throbbing and I want to know if it MUST hurt, SHOULD hurst, or just hurts. But I MUST proceed in accordance with consensus, because to do otherwise would undermine the clarity of our entire specification family.

This Gen-ART reviewer believes that words like "must" have well defined meanings
in the English language, so shouting is not needed at every use. There are
standards track documents that don't use RFC 2119 at all, and I am not only
referring to RFC 791.

I think the upper case keywords should be used only when necessary to clarify
points of potential non-interoperability or insecurity. I'm quite sure that
I've broken that recommendation quite often, and it will always remain
a judgment call. However, inserting a MUST in every sentence that describes
behaviour is surely going too far. I guess the test is whether a reasonably
careful reader might interpret a sentence incorrectly while writing code;
and if so, would a normative keyword help?

     Brian