Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protocol Readers
Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Sat, 05 January 2013 22:53 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 010F421F8583 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:53:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 PN7X8S+IXPWF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:53:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pb0-f47.google.com (mail-pb0-f47.google.com [209.85.160.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84EAD21F8526 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:53:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pb0-f47.google.com with SMTP id un1so9827974pbc.34 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:53:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=q6pZ8QGLv3V0SrlEco8wj32JUxvGFcwoTQh/p6W03Hk=; b=EZMtM/KsKm3KN7KGSHVhSAFX7qbkw5DCYuRBVZWSISNwu3BtVApdttFyHgDlVrDkvZ +RcYPzaL9dOqj6UP/D+c1xOLGSVAqB73A5JXfKHEAycvVlfGTRc6sV8yILYW3OZ2MCLD 1GcZQmwr4uwNB6VLa15/WSd2idkIc9BIEH4gwPIFdLIM//9yB2B9Vxajn7wlhOWehm0u EJucpBBPz/Hcbv/lg8ksf1Nf0lwAM25CKFdYcWSRrozeS9BCw2Jkj01aTDsPvRG+eou2 m68ZinHMcYQX1iOE7Tfe6YDXKedufNrAoozddo/aGNa+p6uAlp5tFuTkpMP2At7l5oVR MP6g==
X-Received: by 10.66.77.38 with SMTP id p6mr165729974paw.47.1357426422332; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:53:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spandex.local (66-230-84-20-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.84.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v2sm35733468paz.36.2013.01.05.14.53.39 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:53:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50E8AEF2.4090103@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 13:53:38 -0900
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protocol Readers
References: <CADnDZ8-yCxUbrD9oFyQKkJuTgDZbamnV8K4GU+sAN5SekpyHAA@mail.gmail.com> <CADnDZ8_a8cRSKrHzE4fZSrMNO6pGLa9vCcHzKUmHsVtCWRCf6g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1301050936060.26235@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1301050936060.26235@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 22:53:43 -0000
On 1/4/13 11:39 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > As an operator, I purchase equipment and need to write RFQs. I would > like to able to ask more than "does the product implement RFC > <whatever>", I want to also ask "Please document all instances where you > did not follow all MUST and SHOULD, and why". > > Otherwise I think there needs to be better definition of what it means > to "implement" or "support" an RFC when it comes to completness and what > this means as per following SHOULD and MAY. I think being clear about who our constituencies are and what they need is probably key to coming to any sort of agreement on any of this. We've often complained about the lack of operator participation and Mikael's comments may be an example the consequences of that - that we don't fully understand how our documents are being used. That said, frankly I've tended to assume that language in standards documents is normative unless otherwise specified, and that highly legalistic language is difficult to read. On a third hand it wouldn't be a small thing if non-native English speakers had an easier time with our documents if every single normative thing in document is flagged through the use of 2119 language. So, basically where that leaves me is: 1) language in standards-track documents is already normative by default; 2) however, if inserting 2119 language in all standards-track documents will make documents more useful to people who actually run networks and/or clearer to people whose first language is not English, it's probably worth tightening up our language. Melinda
- Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protocol Re… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… John C Klensin
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Hector Santos
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Melinda Shore
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Dean Willis
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Dean Willis
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… John C Klensin
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Making RFC2119 key language easier to Protoco… John C Klensin