IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: My two cents on draft-leiba-rfc2119-update

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Wed, 10 August 2016 17:27 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@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 0823C12D7E7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:27:57 -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=ham 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 jzvIfkGNuVGz for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x232.google.com (mail-pa0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232]) (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 9431A12D607 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-x232.google.com with SMTP id ti13so17697214pac.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=AGXE0Ay7Y3Db+Vz4UxDTaLoZbrZ9MKJFyZVa60wKFwE=; b=rjXPkbbXS9w2Vit3onZjvVtajGcPOgZFw5fGrBlfxv33KYdJ6rhfzHo87AtGDN5V8J yrQ02YNumUISLLbobk+6OSIFaxnJrnpT7PegUeOd9hNxsgeOeyskCjxbuSZId4I59t6d nrz/W2YEEl3HIBAbSthy2SKC/iinvVIvgu7MagAbT64GfT84FyeN7EP+izFGbELFV3mP 7VSjkoIt3FRl6ss23asc1wLSM9C6OpSYUhfiEQpxl/kqR6dt/aFog21yHRIh1yefYIhA dVW25FX5GTtyy8yxls2FzgOCDmzI/NQ/2XydB3Gb1OYbnAAFL1nVa72Lub0vHs4YSbgR alGw==
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:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=AGXE0Ay7Y3Db+Vz4UxDTaLoZbrZ9MKJFyZVa60wKFwE=; b=YhXYqwOmCF6jZmc962D4jAS36QYjlNnDqVU7TeXFmpo16Ax/xKK2jhaov4D4rOD2Wb HogSJAQJnWrPLTURpdArc6pEQYO/OhThozkwzkImumhe3DGjWDSPwl9brasrsVjqC89/ OQaxbRQQkG2BD9E6qG20BHNMclGaL43uudaho1B+qfcLZy2qSL+9JJbI3meuJv33dG5u GcXD8v3NRFg94QMslfBcZULGaDgiGTH50i29djOPBNlO54wMoj92RjvnKfihwcZ1SwFU +HYycVGkgS1qYjyE+kpg3IEKgTEhrgTVSglKJhtt/bZOdmsvaWDvATPZ/aOSIdePbG9Y usOg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoout0Ws+FFy24Qzk5ISZO4llaJjM8WTmZ/I6GD49gkx/Z4+S93pNRik+YzKGDEhiHbw==
X-Received: by 10.67.3.197 with SMTP id by5mr9045170pad.119.1470850062995; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Melindas-MacBook-Pro.local (216-67-63-29-radius.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.63.29]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id m128sm65405119pfm.42.2016.08.10.10.27.41 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: My two cents on draft-leiba-rfc2119-update
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <0f2001d1f324$7efe43e0$7cfacba0$@olddog.co.uk> <CALaySJLpmBGxORq-q-LHoWaxq2ZdQeMqUD36j-EapJj1oAJn8A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mqgYA6-bW4WOU3o+LL-F=Hbhx+zpdJ1+vV5fMwqNDNzA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <348c86d0-63a7-45ea-8be4-6791be19ae3b@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:27:39 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1mqgYA6-bW4WOU3o+LL-F=Hbhx+zpdJ1+vV5fMwqNDNzA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LpgBXbNfLD9PkleX6U3u42iBvabOmEb5w"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/lbi6U2YC8rGjhlo1Mw_ahGnO_tQ>
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: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:27:57 -0000

I actually don't worry that much about repeat discussions
unless they're likely to have, or have a history of having,
different outcomes.  The main question I have when I look
at documents like this is the extent to which they'll solve
problems around making sure that our specifications are
sufficiently clear to implement from, and timely, and I'm
unconvinced that this will address either of those questions.

I'd like to think that our review processes are robust enough
to catch misuse.

Melinda

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email