Re: Limits of RFC 2606

"Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Wed, 18 June 2008 18:06 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 1F9B428C1C2; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
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 EB8D03A6998 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.874
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.874 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.275, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 zrNg3CcgwLLh for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA19628C1CC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1K924D-00047I-CR for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:07:33 +0000
Received: from hmbg-d9b88e09.pool.mediaways.net ([217.184.142.9]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:07:33 +0000
Received: from nobody by hmbg-d9b88e09.pool.mediaways.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:07:33 +0000
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: ietf@ietf.org
From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
Subject: Re: Limits of RFC 2606
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:09:14 +0200
Organization: <http://purl.net/xyzzy>
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <g3bisp$a0h$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <8832006D4D21836CBE6DB469@klensin-asus.vbn.inter-touch.net><485590E2.3080107@gmail.com><p06250116c47c330c7dd0@[75.145.176.242]><4856DE3A.3090804@gmail.com> <20080618140053.GA28264@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: hmbg-d9b88e09.pool.mediaways.net
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1914
X-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.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-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> my message is about the "examples" RFC such as 2606,
> 3330, 3849 or 4735.

I don't see a plausible way to reference RFC 4735 
in 2606bis.  The "examples" zoo should get its own 
section in Brian's next IETF marauders map - adding
TLH example in the Usefor RFC for NetNews.

> RFC 3330 has similar problems.

There's a 3330bis draft, if you want more example
IPs we could in theory reserve parts of the former 
"class E" for this purpose.  In practice I think
we're better off with "unreserving" these IPs excl.
255.255.255.255 covered by RFC 1122 (STD 3).  See
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iana-33330bis> +
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuller-240space>
+ the RFC 3330 errata for the state of the art.

> I agree with you, a RFC 2119 "SHOULD" is OK

+1  MUST makes no sense, an RFC 2119 RECOMMENDED
matches what "we" (TINW) want.  But I think that 
boils down to a "judgement call" for all involved
parties (editors, authors, community, Chairs, ADs),
it won't fix the bug(s) in the DISCUSS-"protocol".

 Frank

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf