Re: [tcpm] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn-11: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Thu, 13 September 2018 07:26 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C598130DDC; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 00:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 xe1rMH1GwTFk; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 00:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 757E812D7F8; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 00:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Svantevit.roach.at (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w8D7PQU3021568 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Sep 2018 02:25:27 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.roach.at
To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_T=c3=bcxen?= <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, tcpm-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn@ietf.org
References: <153680710893.9432.14024338054788704789.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5B9A0D13.7060103@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <b8b81e5e-73b2-0b62-3a2d-3fe36c504b51@nostrum.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 02:25:10 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5B9A0D13.7060103@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------6F1385CE3B8C862BED11AC30"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/tVBxDyd_wgPARUTffLnCc7z_NEI>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 07:26:16 -0000

On 9/13/18 2:09 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> Adam,
>
> Thanks for the comments.
> It would be very unusual to hyphenate "congestion control",
> so I'd suggest leaving this as-is to be consistent with other RFCs.


You can, of course, do what you want here, but I'll note that RFC 7233 
is pretty clear about the guidelines used for editorial matters:

>     The world of technical publishing has generally accepted rules for
>     grammar, punctuation, capitalization, sentence length and complexity,
>     parallelism, etc.  The RFC Editor generally follows these accepted
>     rules as defined by the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) [CMOS], with a
>     few important exceptions to avoid ambiguity in complex technical
>     prose and to handle mixtures of text and computer languages, or to
>     preserve historical formatting rules.


And CMOS §7.85 indicates that hyphenation is called for in these 
circumstances.

/a