IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Wed, 01 August 2012 16:08 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 DB90911E810B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6GXKP-hTAfrw for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557A511E80FD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-2066.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-2066.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.32.102]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q71FGu7G010694 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Aug 2012 08:16:56 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for: draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00.txt
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CADnDZ89gg8OYQCuaLHLCKt4BitXB-aC-d0dYGC+e05vTnr6O8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:08:07 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4F6A64BE-7944-4FEE-9AAF-704EE465438F@vpnc.org>
References: <CADnDZ8-zqjf=e1RHp+pr_Jh4x=u5T_pY95U8i_ORRMLXtWLm_A@mail.gmail.com> <B7C8BE95-ADAF-4670-9C6B-7AA26D50FC7C@vpnc.org> <CADnDZ89gg8OYQCuaLHLCKt4BitXB-aC-d0dYGC+e05vTnr6O8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: ietf <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: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 16:08:12 -0000

On Aug 1, 2012, at 7:39 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

>> This is a useless change to a very stable document. No one reading RFCs
>> misunderstands what "if" and "else" mean.
> 
> We don't change the RFC2119 (IETF RFCs never can be changed) its only
> update,

An update is a change.

> no one before ever misunderstood "may" and "should" either but
> capital letters made difference.

Both clauses in that sentence are incorrect. People very much misunderstood "should", which was one of the primary purposes for nailing it down in RFC 2119. The capital letters don't actually make the difference, the definition of the words make the difference.

> However, thanks for your comments,

No problem.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status