IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] upcoming adoptions - this appendix is normative

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Mon, 02 October 2017 09:10 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F5A213448C for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 02:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -11.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 aTEB6FIdL2Pi for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 02:10:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B522F132F2C for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 02:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1242; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1506935448; x=1508145048; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+fqyTtZ/XBYRk7CRim7UZagYZMmSsR4gMexD1+fD4qA=; b=VXbDZ++aR8dW+GE4NgKrcP4RNp0TDNBJzrbj3dVO/VTjHUDMVRAT46Vh MpCKnzRLPTdBab3viByswcTlLG9PupETHCOtsp4EpI+0rF8yDCt504G2Z DK81GAd2hb1XbT5sakoupeKZIyjN+aBzlCButBckwgkWrW+bliUamVqxg g=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,468,1500940800"; d="scan'208";a="697696087"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Oct 2017 09:10:46 +0000
Received: from [10.55.221.36] (ams-bclaise-nitro3.cisco.com [10.55.221.36]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v929Ak9a030821; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:10:46 GMT
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, netmod@ietf.org, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
References: <14299503-509D-43BE-A938-0B7B88C3B249@juniper.net> <36ba3d4b-1ae1-0666-12cf-db41e172924b@cisco.com> <75739d75-da96-b340-2403-d0949ac54ed7@labn.net> <19134054-D52E-4A6D-992A-A47F365557AD@juniper.net> <2891bd09-0e0d-415c-2714-15141a293e42@cisco.com> <D14158EF-77F4-4E0A-9A06-213F5CF04647@juniper.net> <011d01d32d77$c8e0a500$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <9c0d8394-b2a4-180a-2454-8955c1721423@labn.net> <003801d32e3f$ba625460$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <920d0500-e7ea-66ff-5124-a025a438dbac@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 11:10:47 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <003801d32e3f$ba625460$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/skeT3IfeW8cZtneyU-qyIPxyHGY>
Subject: Re: [netmod] upcoming adoptions - this appendix is normative
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 09:10:50 -0000

Dear all,

To avoid any confusion, just clearly mention it.
     "This appendix is normative | informative"
No need to debate for hours on this.

Regards, Benoit
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net>
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 6:06 PM
>
>> On 9/14/2017 12:36 PM, t.petch wrote:
>>> Appendices are Normative if they say that they are Normative.  The
>>> default is that they are not so say that they are and they are.
> This is
>>> well established practice.
>> Hi Tom,
>> My memory (I haven't checked recently) is there is nothing in or
>> defined process that says if an Appendix is normative or not. Other
>> SDOs certainly have formal definitions here. Within the IETF, my view
>> has been that if an appendix includes RFC2119 language, it is
>> normative. Actually, strictly speaking, any text in a Standards Track
>> RFC that doesn't include RFC2119 language is just informative.
> Lou
>
> Try RFC4910.
>
> '   This appendix is normative.'
>
> and not a SHOULD or a MUST in sight.
>
> Tom Petch
>
>> Lou
>>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> .
>

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status