Re: More Path notes (was: Protocol changes in draft-allbery-usefor-usepro-00)

["Charles Lindsey" <[e-mail]>]

In <[e-mail]> Russ Allbery <[e-mail]> writes:

>Charles Lindsey <[e-mail]> writes:
>> Russ Allbery <[e-mail]> writes:
>>> Charles Lindsey <[e-mail]> writes:

>>>> 1. [-1] (2.2) <path-identity> - Possibility to use a FQDN not
>>>> resolvable in the DNS.

>>>> (This was a suggestion by Harald, & 1 of 2 alternatives in USEPRO)

OK, I responded to this in an earlier thread.

>>>> 2. [00] (3.2) <path-identity>s are case-sensitive.

>> OK, I will buy that.

And now you aren't selling it :-( .

>The more I research this, though, the more I think that while the above is
>true, it's not ideal.  Poking around a bit, it looks like a *lot* of
>existing implementations are case-insensitive, and I'm not sure I want to
>declare that incorrect.  Accordingly, I now have the following text, which
>I think is an improvement.  Please, everyone, let me know if you disagree:

>   Some existing implementations treat <path-identity> as case-
>   sensitive, some case-insensitive.  The <path-identity> therefore
>   SHOULD be all lowercase and implementations SHOULD compare identities
>   case-insensitively.

First SHOULD is OK, but I am no sure why you then choose
case-insensitivity, since that is more work in an intensively used piece
of code. I would have chosen case-sensitively which should be OK if they
obey the first SHOULD, and lots of them do it anyway. Or let them do it
anyway they wish, provided they understand the risk (which is no worse
then being sent some articles you have already seen).

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: [e-mail]      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5