IETF Logo Mail Archive

[saag] Date formats: RFC3339 vs. RFC 5322

Yakov Shafranovich <yakov@nightwatchcybersecurity.com> Tue, 13 April 2021 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <yakov@nightwatchcybersecurity.com>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E58A73A22D9 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nightwatchcybersecurity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Zgu_4-uCJKDf for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com (mail-wm1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AC303A12C5 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id w186so4783036wmg.3 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nightwatchcybersecurity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=VAYxMcrcZz68tHU/U/kXbt60hIoPE2hkXIA92BtmE3w=; b=uhbK3add8usUa48XjTbtTGzBvPKIu76MWK7tJ8klqiBKafnA8U6MaKL+0TlkzL6EhN tBlGpbP5Pq2itiWQEKgfvajzAtWf3Qn0ButVZaN3Z9Le1MmlnGZgiIu1q5yIzzhi62U5 2I6FYMHy8VHMj8WHgsq6645LiMTy6sFBTvnLCTuoLpaEmQ3fDtIvEbp7sYDY9/QrySRQ +fiL/mZv3EGy99zDP1N86fGDt+gh9Wa3telahVKRzRi/L73zPhn9tCXKBAGJ9rak/yPF FGzzk7yNpdEcfMu7H3r0PfhgbTWGQgD73ZtCYMA4JbzDcFRO4+Rsg6pDIt1jvVcn+BiM NjeQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=VAYxMcrcZz68tHU/U/kXbt60hIoPE2hkXIA92BtmE3w=; b=HQii1KSsBk7AzoDk2RRrUP5FCUwKoN3OSDteFgGbu2KbECshbHFVZV1o8fsJyGP0PN ZJIymw9BRPaon5WMpdF0yA8hHN1V8Y4hneXMGI3NMJDXek/vkjKdhW4V235hWjLg/0Lf GhnoWgAOToeCiswJlcNuyiMu9ffcIU+rLFfadRS7ySuMU7rdvVwoArMzxUF9htKGsCYV v0TrLx0yW68EOgaMdJ4XaaIBWxHL8WPNyC/OtmoZdfD5Q7TAOt7A+jsYeznGyeSbFKO6 4tkMI+pzW29J7p47LuJTrSXAiCeb7+F8rD4NsKGnA8E8XvsLVIwFGkiAV/E36lB7jmd3 d8ug==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531AGD+ub3LqTCfgMBaNYkS4Ea7CWSbFrBVdg0BaCIE7e60qB6Cm zVtLvTkV5gq3ScjEH7STcNVMMgKM+P/aVYwo4++j3mOlsJWg1A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/CKb+H6MfXu6lu2NVUY0EN0S1yxXSqxfeMU0X0hLawq8dTrfha4xo7zqFj+EXCRi+cbtQYwzKLffWiBK8kgM=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6a01:: with SMTP id f1mr1368649wmc.144.1618339451272; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Yakov Shafranovich <yakov@nightwatchcybersecurity.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 14:43:36 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAyEnSMBdXCA0EvgR79P_1gi15pAPfeyu_HgGqgMjWxRP8sxKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: saag@ietf.org, art@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/pnd4GmTVH3cBOP3j4vnjgQ4RtGQ>
Subject: [saag] Date formats: RFC3339 vs. RFC 5322
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/saag/>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:44:19 -0000

Is there a preference for Internet drafts/RFCs regarding the specific
data/time format to be used?

Right now we are referencing RFC 5322, but there has been feedback
from multiple people that the ISO 8601 format is easier to parse. This
is in regards to the section 3.5.5 of "draft-foudil-securitytxt-11"
that I am working on:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-foudil-securitytxt-11#section-3.5.4

The options I am asking about are the following:
- RFC 3339 (a profile of ISO 8601)
Example: 2021-04-13T06:50:53-07:00

- RFC 5322, section 3.3
Example: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 06:50:53 -0700

Thanks

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email