Re: [stir] Proposal for update of erratum #6519 - ppt syntax

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

I didn't know the rules in IETF were "we believe in rough consensus - or in whoever has the most SIP implementations".

(FWIW, I do have some SIP implementation experience myself.)

However, I have not objected to your proposal. My issue is whether we really need to define a new syntax for a string value, that doesn't exist anywhere else.

Regards,

Christer

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <[e-mail]> 
Sent: perjantai 23. huhtikuuta 2021 19.42
To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>; Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>
Cc: Russ Housley <[e-mail]>; IETF STIR Mail List <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [stir] Proposal for update of erratum #6519 - ppt syntax

I have to ask:  What, in your implementation of STIR, made you so confident that what you propose is better than what Roman (I assume also a SIP implementer) and I (a 5 times SIP implementer and one time STIR implementer) propose?

On 4/23/21 9:34 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> On 4/23/21 9:27 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> With quoted string we wouldn't need such text.
> 
> You would need an even longer text that explains that a quoted-string that contains characters that are not in the definition of token -- excepted for the initial quote and the last quote -- is invalid.  You would also need to explain that, contrary to the rule for a quoted-string, the string is case-insensitive.  And you still have to explain that the string needs to be normalized before copy in the JSON document.
> 
> So many words.
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <[e-mail]>
>> Sent: torstai 22. huhtikuuta 2021 21.07
>> To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>; Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: Russ Housley <[e-mail]>; IETF STIR Mail List <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: Re: [stir] Proposal for update of erratum #6519 - ppt syntax
>>
>> On 4/22/21 11:02 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Another thing. Since we are now using DQUOTE, won't those become part of the ppt value? I guess we don't want that.
>>
>> The text I proposed is taking care of that:
>>
>> ...a quoted value whose unquoted part is equivalent to the token in the "ppt" parameter, normalized to contain only lowercase characters...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Christer
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 9:00 PM
>>> To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>
>>> Cc: Marc Petit-Huguenin <[e-mail]>; Russ Housley <[e-mail]>; IETF STIR Mail List <[e-mail]>
>>> Subject: Re: [stir] Proposal for update of erratum #6519 - ppt syntax
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1:54 PM Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>> Doesn't the SIP ABNF allow spaces (LWS) between the different "syntax parts", DQUOTE and token in this case?
>>>
>>> I do not think so. At least all other elements like LQUOT and DQUOT explicitly define where LWS is allowed.
>>> _____________
>>> Roman Shpount
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: [e-mail]
Blog: https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=5fb11394-002a2af5-5fb1530f-86d8a30ca42b-b2a5f71da88e95f2&q=1&e=e9ee079a-7a86-4ece-b168-5187a95afadd&u=https%3A%2F%2Fmarc.petit-huguenin.org%2F
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug