IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Fwd: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 11 August 2015 23:40 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DDE1A00D4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.366
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.366 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 eyoqZG5s8gwn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a25.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08C21A00CD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a25.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a25.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908B8678063; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=+YKrDsUMMen5CF 29mUrDhxvT/Kg=; b=tJyZFStlb/k6Y91slYV/Z25UV2M247XOwMX8OO9Jp4Wqso WWss0BSlbRazFWAs9fURvN9mMnlEOTm5DkDOxbkPKHLRMgeeB22QvjciVm/nc6lS e/4ismSvITvbgwYeswCmmZNJwZCuIaP3u2quneXS/SPdtgq+3JKUGR+SS95Rk=
Received: from localhost (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a25.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1D8E0678062; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:40:28 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP
Message-ID: <20150811234027.GB3696@localhost>
References: <20150810171306.11047.24159.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <55C8EBAE.4070704@cs.tcd.ie> <16936.1439312184@sandelman.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <16936.1439312184@sandelman.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vWwy3NAXlfkbyYSYPxMQlSJqx8Q>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 23:40:31 -0000

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:56:24PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> I would propose that the new BCP be the set of 1984 and RFC2804 (which is
> also informational).
> I also think that this would be proceedurally make more sense.

I agree, this does make much more sense.

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email