IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] RECOMMENDS

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 04 January 2024 19:47 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3814EC14F711 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 11:47:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.199 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.091, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 NoIbwsUjhVL1 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 11:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62a.google.com (mail-pl1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62a]) (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 1D847C14F6E0 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 11:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1d3e2972f65so4532565ad.3 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 11:47:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704397671; x=1705002471; darn=rfc-editor.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Z2dbYwJR17bVBgI2vDtmJ39INriQojCdDzPcThWLsMc=; b=jZbjccb2HQo8lLCJLKdj/ZeA1llbaguKpN0PsjpGQeiKEtISg33ziPAdQwbBK2zBki QnnH7z8O6TPFYU2Ebz+hCaXhHx3QwYNpdHtkvVYqwMgvSL1ieELtFHw7B2NSFhMOXeeV JKu4DJOUTIUqUV+mv4B/9uFW6JpxtWa3GSDUiiyr0xEEjJF4XntGn752DiobpsNilPBV nVCRjewf8083ofkzG7lctBhHMPTU7HJknaL5fVIxSqbqOcckIeVUzG37o15KWzu8e40C LvEujcxuCJjhHFxZnDXGmP7KNRIkjf2vKTgzQvGrYVxj8Q9dqyHn0UrOAGDdQlEpW2QL CtIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704397671; x=1705002471; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Z2dbYwJR17bVBgI2vDtmJ39INriQojCdDzPcThWLsMc=; b=kv2XyIscM71FaNxdqXsvRCqqgENSPuKzdvktVaYFNsIvfsppAk2/JbLJl86S2cMdCt 8AYl0Ev+/yd2XEWs+ujeyv/9lDV3Qh4D7oiaYXjVVhcVqQRwIeMiY7Fn6ZBh8vnpFcdU TK1y3zEdxwM2u+r97dlpZABgdTSg2trGyQQnjD/FO8FJKQ9t/rJwZN0mo14h+UGjLTgG t1tdB8UonFOL+piKbm/ekUNQsvZmqpVw3HINB3/Y+xJiduXLK/58UmMLSikHPtMcCyWI /AiMPqFy5/Z4Q8TKP3yMybjBGa/2AINqFPAe1tZXlK2qhAKWuOQHhkmIgMLS1qT4830N GHdA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YykTYCnOUac60+QAlnin068pkexruHSOm7Oj2WFz1Vtm+XlqMk5 5GllUxNcOT+HdWa6sc2A0B2NNXZnAhl2Nw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE4oP6hkECyLvNzAQ2tTJXDuaqpBBEQ4L03pAfjp4qWNx5pFQolpQlAAlhKgFF6xsYI0hYFgQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7c92:b0:1d4:e22f:7d0e with SMTP id y18-20020a1709027c9200b001d4e22f7d0emr675907pll.103.1704397671084; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 11:47:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPV6:2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707? ([2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 17-20020a170902c21100b001d1d5fb96f9sm837pll.27.2024.01.04.11.47.49 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Jan 2024 11:47:50 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <a13ee50a-234e-54ac-80e0-8f28696bb117@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 08:47:47 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <d2c2ffee-1af6-8441-7486-06115542690d@gmail.com> <13079.1704159169@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <ccb81ba5-d09c-a849-c32e-aaaa16cde968@gmail.com> <DM6PR02MB43774EE37D2FCB4C10A581F7D861A@DM6PR02MB4377.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <c49f652f-e370-4e61-8e14-a8c61079617f@gmx.de> <CANMZLAZu_xTGor6tZdSE3RiW+gRvEN-snYLepgU_HQxL2EgcnQ@mail.gmail.com> <d27bf8eb-9fce-41d2-9895-33d8f0ec9fac@nostrum.com> <18687.1704296479@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <CAA=duU3rfh07b7uA9N2-TH_X-_LzOwY9RXH0AJv+wWBB35KBuQ@mail.gmail.com> <74429EE1-8301-48D9-99AF-1223AD20B888@gmail.com> <4b345ddc-ab88-437a-8510-8e0c4c106ba4@gmx.de>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4b345ddc-ab88-437a-8510-8e0c4c106ba4@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/XqTKnYrMrwF_qHUIphz9MCZJZSE>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] RECOMMENDS
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 19:47:54 -0000

On 05-Jan-24 05:19, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Am 04.01.2024 um 17:18 schrieb Bob Hinden:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> On Jan 3, 2024, at 8:11 AM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Like Michael, I'm also the author of an RFC (8469) that uses the
>>> phrase "This document RECOMMENDS ...". As Brian noted, we could have
>>> used "It is RECOMMENDED that..." but we preferred the active voice,
>>> and obviously the IESG and RFC Editor had no problem with it. I also
>>> agree that it should be made official.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I also like the active voice.
>>
>> Perhaps an errata can be filed that makes this clearer.
>>
>> Bob
> 
> I don't think this qualifies as "erratum". It's a feature request.

In the present regime, it would be an erratum that would likely end up as
"hold for document update".

If it wasn't for the fact that it will indeed end up as a feature
request for a change in RFC2XML, I would already have filed the
erratum.

     Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email