IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] RFC 2119 language in an informational draft?

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Fri, 06 August 2021 03:39 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638343A1AB5; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 20:39:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=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=gmail.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 EtU4z8FDLgPz; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 20:38:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52a.google.com (mail-ed1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52a]) (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 B7EFF3A1AB1; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 20:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id ec13so11340875edb.0; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 20:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ou9nTA6apYF9SujfD5O1Gb5TY7/paTiNN++FtuTW8b0=; b=c+n5oRWmSy6KKmsbqaV3TWXShMgQFwSVqxYZW9xmy5hMEgkG/nEb8llj9N46A0qDaE TKP4lflS82PtXc3ielxXZL+RzhAEidZSzXG7KdjCnbsNU6EBz+y8GUIz3QT6FB/qDlPI 793m+tqn/RFVtXkW0wlrGHn9+5J2k+1Vu4sbgWI9Y+ZH4A3DMI/MAWfGhjepEs9Ub4FD 5YmClXLGWz+xvR8095pIM4W/ZiE/57WduzK0tAbdEFWZbSB52Pqoojk+jf15du6Onzwr GuT23nJXxHLN2ih/mbBxoH1nTTTymdGr1EY3SWwVjkdpe7Qllzo9MEEWL326XrBxQvcf 09Sw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ou9nTA6apYF9SujfD5O1Gb5TY7/paTiNN++FtuTW8b0=; b=eBDkj/FIsHCD32dLgHuQQtYtKk9ppiQoBCdJc2Ea9iARC1NWwluPGuG4qoV4q/OFFI 0HlS4afW93dVwsA1OqVi5JTzd3eZhlFq9WkNDEuVqcWtPg3A+NhKs2ipaTmcJBUHyb10 HXZSdR6LU60lfzsjcnu9eTNT1hOJQ68bsEQhACPKMMgN0U2JcUMzP2mIkKmBF5NtrT/f bEyB5JV8JE5V1Gx3CFtVlgqefSBccBrnw5gn2zqZtsq7U3tgN8nqX6Jng89k/RLwohGp QeHSxqhY0AP5RKS0hvgTTAqqHByPlTq/66jgbqF8iuWqizZ54AkU5yfxQ6bIkM3oCNUk Aqtw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531kVRprr0fcHSBan7jjiaql39HRMVRvtKtPqHrHqZg80jLTKFmZ hAaPkBZYEVgwHWgTBZa2Zm8iqE9MSWB3tws0zX0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJylP/bkf9x60OyMh3MUo+8V2zMqAsXkrjLf0OQAJ1FYAJo7C1ImX4Nd6/nxdpDq4KE6Fyp9aaBWJgBntb1O2tE=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:215:: with SMTP id t21mr10522702edv.68.1628221133350; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 20:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8C6FB7BC-FF56-4E24-878B-50CB02DA4BAF@gmail.com> <AM7PR07MB6248727B1EC4C3252B4E93C6A0F29@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAHw9_iJX5QEKWaLNeTXCZvtNSTo6ApD-Mh=mhmdKEMWYZCmoPQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_iJX5QEKWaLNeTXCZvtNSTo6ApD-Mh=mhmdKEMWYZCmoPQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 13:38:41 +1000
Message-ID: <CAFU7BAQkyyhYAT6MRj6=OXSh2Vpiym8OqNc5VACO=OdW5SAEVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Cc: tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-yu-v6ops-split6@ietf.org" <draft-yu-v6ops-split6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/OfwO5_pa8j37yzkBRTfOM4V7KEE>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] RFC 2119 language in an informational draft?
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 03:39:00 -0000

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:22 AM Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
>> May I suggest that an informational draft doesn't impose requirements, so there is no need for RFC 2119 language?
>> I think that that suggestion is erroneous.
>
> +1.
>
> While this might be argumentum ad antiquitam, it is clear that this isn't the standard interpretation.
>
> Looking through the RFCs 8000 and above, I find 262 Informational documents using RFC2119 (RFC8174) language, and >4000 instances:
> $ for file in (grep -l 'Category: Informational' rfc8???.txt)
>                                                   egrep "SHOULD|MUST|REQUIRED|SHALL|RECOMMENDED|MAY|OPTIONAL" $file
>                                               end > ~/tmp/info_2119.txt
> $ wc -l ~/tmp/info_2119.txt
>   4023

[pedantic mode on] An informational document may contain quotes from
the standard ones, so your grep would count them as well.

-- 
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email