IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ippm] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-05: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 21 June 2018 19:19 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA6A130DFB for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 12:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 5ieeSUVWdn-a for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 12:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 56295130DFF for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 12:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.95] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w5LJInJ9066345 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:18:50 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.95]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <8809800D-4DF6-43E4-99B6-6FD6F3FABFFE@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C3F1B1B6-60A5-4E69-BF52-925F6FCD8AEF"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\))
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:18:48 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF4A92F15A@njmtexg4.research.att.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6@ietf.org>, Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>, Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>, "ippm-chairs@ietf.org" <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>, "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
References: <152946514936.32242.15260380803081346147.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF4A92F15A@njmtexg4.research.att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/wWDQoJr08jXfmlvmKRNlK2ImEuc>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 19:19:07 -0000


> On Jun 21, 2018, at 2:13 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acm@research.att.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben@nostrum.com]
> ...
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Requirements Language: Please use the actual boilerplate specified in RFC
>> 8174.
>> 
> [acm]
> We have:
> 32	Requirements Language
> 
> 34	   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
> 35	   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
> 36	   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] and updated
> 37	   by [RFC8174].
> 
> and RFC 8174 says:
> 
> 
>   Authors who follow these guidelines should incorporate this phrase
>   near the beginning of their document:
> 
>      The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
>      NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED",
>      "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as
>      described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they
>      appear in all capitals, as shown here.
> 
> Noting that RFC 8174 uses a lower-case "should", there's no requirement
> to use this exact wording, right?

My primary concern is not the exact wording, but the fact that the 8174 boilerplate mentions the part about appearing in all capitals.

> 
> But you said "please", and that means much more than "should”.

Thanks :-)

> 
> I've updated the working text (and I have many others in-flight
> that need this update, too).
> 
> regards,
> Al
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email