IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jsonpath] Paul Wouters' Yes on draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp-07: (with COMMENT)

Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io> Tue, 20 June 2023 12:48 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
X-Original-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C768C151071 for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=aiven.io
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G7XeIcYH1Ooz for <jsonpath@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 05:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x534.google.com (mail-ed1-x534.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::534]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD2CEC151980 for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 05:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x534.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-519274f7b05so6203785a12.3 for <jsonpath@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 05:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aiven.io; s=google; t=1687265295; x=1689857295; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=aRujw+laf+r47u4SOKzoo4A1oioK9VyyOHQ0HKUaWgk=; b=EC3w022ImKZ5znDvmZU1Pl+7mf4anVbgXjRXAoBHxhP+bn6SGskVl8Jr05m/R7kVM2 q0/Q4OaOaUCIdOWdM6XMbe9LHoWjAesl9hWsmofJ5kG1aNEITe6hly9Du5ma09aFjk0H dU38jyZSwR8mdwI2WY37jX9IGxWoWhJy7yezQ=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1687265295; x=1689857295; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=aRujw+laf+r47u4SOKzoo4A1oioK9VyyOHQ0HKUaWgk=; b=BP5WDcFDh+vlYFWL/cG9PgNYJy1WrPhg11a2qwEj72b/TywlwxL/xm8rq09TOMgXH3 zfM6EPPSIQyJn7QCMs/kFuidKF2pZaMor2DA2WmQtz/ddvKp9tXJzPkfQbRLjlZRzxm4 hZ1OAoK5ko5+S3/IqVX83u/Br51DaJOjQCHtBuktATTATf68r3QHMUfS8Bu+s+2O7Vvr Ogd+XtOGo6yr95NxVg9E956aiJCgMPi9nzInr4+URS0NXRHRpx3QAgOgHN1TXJVTusZC +FCghnGGHxrbjXU9vEZaBh2PZ3p/iKvZsVT5/ha5Ld151Uyyhgroe9YwN27CfnwbzxkG F6nw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDyfoULVthQmbaFOid9h38gq2uyNoUTOUdNa0jyYevorgRB92xX2 2qVCR2vTAlby2Y28b7OtqyKSBQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ5SQ6nPi55zYRwEh6QEsAge6o8fR4xd0R3dSvksn8uRfxV6YKW+lwqQewFMZl21dL6HHUjDoQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6ea8:b0:978:8925:7a08 with SMTP id sh40-20020a1709076ea800b0097889257a08mr14026807ejc.72.1687265295193; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 05:48:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([74.122.52.94]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id dv5-20020a170906b80500b00988a364023bsm1319058ejb.127.2023.06.20.05.48.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Jun 2023 05:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 08:47:51 -0400
Message-Id: <BB6FA83B-CE7D-4E29-A576-F24D9AC1826F@aiven.io>
References: <33373AF5-6FB7-465F-A316-59088031525C@tzi.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp@ietf.org, jsonpath-chairs@ietf.org, jsonpath@ietf.org, james.ietf@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <33373AF5-6FB7-465F-A316-59088031525C@tzi.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (20C65)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jsonpath/RgnrMSFo-5Jjkupy9BM2loWbBIM>
Subject: Re: [Jsonpath] Paul Wouters' Yes on draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp-07: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: jsonpath@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: A summary description of the list to be included in the table on this page <jsonpath.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jsonpath>, <mailto:jsonpath-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jsonpath/>
List-Post: <mailto:jsonpath@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jsonpath-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonpath>, <mailto:jsonpath-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 12:48:21 -0000

Thanks for the update Carsten. That makes sense.

Paul

Sent using a virtual keyboard on a phone

> On Jun 19, 2023, at 15:03, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
>> On 2023-06-19, at 03:22, Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp-07: Yes
>> 
>> […]
>> 
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp/
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Why not leave in Appendix A ?
> 
> good question; we could have provided a reason.
> 
> The analysis that now is in Appendix A was part of the initial submission of this specification, gauging the coverage that iregexp would provide in recent RFCs.  It has not been updated since May 2021, and it is not necessarily presented in the best way.
> The document shepherd feedback in 2022 was that we should not publish it with the RFC.
> As it was excluded from publication since, it does not necessarily have the same level of review or consensus as the other parts.
> 
> I do believe it would be good thing to do a more detailed study of the use of Regexes in RFCs (possibly in ufmrg?), but this specification is not the place for that.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email