[salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax
Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com> Wed, 13 February 2013 14:46 UTC
Return-Path: <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4BC821F871D for <salud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:46:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.827
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.827 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MANGLED_TOOL=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OkoUk81Eshj6 for <salud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:46:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lb0-f177.google.com (mail-lb0-f177.google.com [209.85.217.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD3021F86FC for <salud@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:46:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id go11so1002561lbb.36 for <salud@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:46:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=fR35KN+UtrcujZOZ3m0UUlvo+Q3Nyt41bpNCOGWGTIE=; b=JJbpY9rpf0YsdbDFguKsmnDP7NKxc0ZWHk7YEIZStFM6tnTR8w5xNsjXCcaP5Ytqb9 o/AV8XaTI4lN0b8bGJvy1nFG3TRQeLE74eoX+n7unHv2j7szmqU+RhDgMaanvSSdaUHo c3RiS4RyKh9EALwoj3dD6dfBUmF0L0wiIAsp8D3YdXD+q1D2wQn2iDXScc3P22Z1GgQ4 jjKH6sCS2KdWAefyJ5dr3h7a1U03oQqyEeX8B6MPgR97LA1sAUfuo/OIvsxRmGzOJ5z8 6H47VpnQ+BwmUOjnwJNUq7Sxu5br4BVCrtt/rqQGB7QTCBPsVJmcuVcqHxhcTQlKL01y RaXg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.125.239 with SMTP id mt15mr20423388lab.26.1360766802841; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:46:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.114.95.99 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:46:42 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:46:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CACWXZj2WhAsmQ3Ku7bVpiNhbFxX7-vx9d9wWzzKgiVLSeKk__g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com>
To: salud@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax
X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list <salud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/salud>, <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/salud>
List-Post: <mailto:salud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud>, <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:46:44 -0000
Hi, Because we had several changes and discussions which affect the syntax, I send a new version to the list, including the rules for <date>. I used the <provider-id>, <MM> and <DD> definitions from the RFC 4198. Please let me know what you think of it. alert-URN = "urn:alert:" alert-identifier alert-identifier = alert-category ":" alert-indication alert-category = name/private-name alert-indication = alert-name *(":" alert-name) alert-name = name/private-name name = label private-name = label"@"provider-id["(" date ")"] provider-id = 1*(label ".") toplabel date = [CC] YY ["-" MM ["-" DD] ] label = let-dig [ *let-dig-hyp let-dig ] let-dig-hyp = let-dig / "-" let-dig = ALPHA / DIGIT YY = CC CC = DIGIT DIGIT MM = ("0" %x31-39) / ("1" %x30-32) DD = ("0" %x31-39) / (%x31-32 DIGIT) / "30" / "31" ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z DIGIT = %x30-39 ; 0-9 DIGIT-1-9 = %x31-39 ; 1-9 DIGIT-2-9 = %x32-39 ; 2-9 Following rules apply to the <date> usage: a) A provider is permitted to use any <date> within its domain name ownership time period. b) If the <date> is absent, it defaults to 2013-01-01. c) If <DD> or <MM> are absent each defaults to 01. d) If <CC> is absent it defaults to 20. e) Comparison is based on the full <CCYY-MM-DD> after defaults have been filled in. f) A provider is allowed to use a domain name without a date if he owns the domain at the default year 2013 or if he is able to verify that he is the first owner of the domain, e.g. by checking reliable domain history tools. Note: We assume that the domain ownership does not change during the same year. Thank you Laura
- [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- [salud] Fwd: New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] New version of the ABNF-syntax Laura Liess