Re: [Lager] Incoming AD review on draft-ietf-lager-specification-11.txt

On 30 Mar 2016, at 18:47, Kim Davies wrote:

> Hi Alexey, Hi all,
>
> On 3/24/16, 10:46 AM, "Lager on behalf of Alexey Melnikov" 
> <lager-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>> In Section 4.3.5
>>
>> The first mention of "media type" needs a normative reference to RFC
>> 2045. This would save developers time with trying to find out what
>> syntax to support and where to find registered media types.
>
> OK, will add.
>
>> In 11.3:
>>
>> I think this section needs a bit of work. Firstly, it might be better 
>> to
>> say that Standard Dispositions MUST NOT contain ":" character in 
>> order
>> to prevent clashes with private dispositions.
>
> OK.
>
>> Also, saying that registered values are lowercase ASCII (for example)
>> would be a good idea. If you want to only allow ASCII, but not to 
>> limit
>> values to lowercase letters, then you need to say whether values in 
>> the
>> registry are case-sensitive or not.
>
> I imagine this observation can be made more generally across the 
> specification.
> I can make this change but wonder if the case-sensitivity needs to
> be explicit in other aspects of the specification for the same reason?
>
>>> Private Dispositions - This registry shall list dispositions that
>>> have been registered on a first-come first-served basis by third 
>>> parties
>>> with the IANA. Such dispositions must take the form 
>>> "entity:disposition"
>>> where the entity is a prefix that uniquely identifies the private 
>>> user
>>> of the namespace. For example, "acme:reserved" could be a private 
>>> extension
>>> used by the organization ACME to denote a disposition relating to 
>>> reserved
>>> labels.
>>
>> I think "entity" should be better specified. Which characters are
>> allowed? I would recommend either use domain names to describe 
>> ownerhip
>> (I can suggest some text) or use values from the PEN IANA registry
>> <https://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers/enterprise-numbers>?
>
> Given it sounds like you have a clear concept in your mind, I would 
> appreciate
> suggested text on how to use domain names or PENs to namespace the 
> private
> dispositions. A domain name based approach may be the simplest option 
> here
> given that PENs may be an unfamiliar concept to typical authors of 
> these tables,
> and are not used elsewhere in the document.

FYI, we used PEN for vCard4 private namespace. Having said that, the set 
of organisations for developing extensions of vCards is pretty small and 
well known and have 99% of chance of 1. having a PEN 2. large 
corporations with engineering staff that may find easy.  On the other 
hand, LGR editors could be linguistic experts which have no clue of the 
PEN and may not relate to PEN registration (even if it is FCFS). So I 
think domain names are probably better in this case.

Marc.

>
> kim_______________________________________________
> Lager mailing list
> Lager@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lager