Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-02.txt]

SM <sm@resistor.net> Thu, 12 July 2012 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1531F11E80A5 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 xU0ITJmz6iO5 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE88D11E8098 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6CMbFYU002656; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:37:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1342132641; bh=vTKbqwg8ekuL95lxzrG4SNYUak04blk6YB0zt6XVGag=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=IZ2nd/tYrVYf5scC5wb3ZstremSu2Ghusw6IP0ohiS3Bdh/8c8jR3csQYKHzsdZa+ wTFr2RthX+24k6Wty3tjHj3N/+eWS+4h3J1ma0QuUdca88fSnjeUDxJVJIJ/ya9lDR l6ItUxcnxd678g5coTRfhMGrJ/a85S8TLNNp+ekc=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1342132641; i=@resistor.net; bh=vTKbqwg8ekuL95lxzrG4SNYUak04blk6YB0zt6XVGag=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=mUxkZtwTankj6Z2namfhjEQext7m479UioXauz/jACRh/l4tsg5CSfPshPjyjEvEd Kdy1VgXyjMr44ZdUtmz1D64MJJ8LKWDkn1FZFrJgLItagcj0WhwUxE8rD+4VDvK8k0 TlHxxRzuhBXfLLXhWnRvRfcuw4vWZ7kPlo5fZbLM=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20120712152812.082ba6f8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:34:48 -0700
To: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-02.txt]
In-Reply-To: <4FFF29E2.6090909@viagenie.ca>
References: <4FFD71D7.4070209@gmail.com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653B6BF582@TK5EX14MBXW603.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <4FFF29E2.6090909@viagenie.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 22:36:50 -0000

Hi Simon,
At 12:47 12-07-2012, Simon Perreault wrote:
>Suggestion:
>On input, applications MUST accept the formal syntax and MAY accept 
>another syntax.
>On output, applications MUST use the formal syntax and MUST NOT use 
>another syntax.

As long as an implementation supports the formal syntax, there is 
interoperability.  Telling people what not to use sounds appropriate 
if there is a good reason to do so.  The requirements seem redundant to me.

Regards,
-sm