Re: [xmpp] Barry Leiba's Yes on draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-23: (with COMMENT)

Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net> Tue, 09 June 2015 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <peter@andyet.net>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 825BA1A88BA for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 08:27:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 LFUuX846Aegw for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 08:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-f169.google.com (mail-ig0-f169.google.com [209.85.213.169]) (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 44F4B1A889D for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 08:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igbzc4 with SMTP id zc4so15067885igb.0 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 08:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=QOd5WOOiDOkd5eTvIXL720bhhVDAt0cZHQK58InXcCk=; b=RIFf65/ZG/4RKLzyexe/KJP3/ziaG4NHY7AiIal4FSBUJdnuRN4FEiY9XIR1uTz94S 7ogZ652vBA9o4xi56WAiYYYGkhCgBMvXDl+4zZ/lclJ9fAy1xuMqiPAzaYLIjtepxXfw YLJZ9XEwZoqT01zUloiJwF1H3C7aDu6k++b+HHH2m75bzQGQedfhGvXOwqjJUB0bfK/h lnxzhpWJAVDGBgHI5wQGoMZ9BNrbNkI/6WaGkF9CWlSN8pEFCKfGbxf7pcd8EOUZQZTK QQoD7tap3eO/uyw2/usYy9zl9JrqXLI2tYssZWZAipq3HcThMaaSbVR1f5zmfQ/I7NFO vijA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwO/9DcKn9dwo1C3GYZT06PMW9Vkkh6K1LwLDbzQPVo+o8njCvIgYG0Vy4MkNQPGiuW3CA
X-Received: by 10.50.59.211 with SMTP id b19mr20788642igr.42.1433863626697; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 08:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aither.local ([2601:1:8200:3a60:fd92:c902:2aa6:49ec]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r34sm4100313ioi.34.2015.06.09.08.27.04 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jun 2015 08:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <557705C8.3000306@andyet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 09:27:04 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <20150609110459.26823.80392.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150609110459.26823.80392.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/g-vEfWA1limQ_4DdcEy77K1fIUI>
Cc: xmpp-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis@ietf.org, xmpp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis.ad@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis.shepherd@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [xmpp] Barry Leiba's Yes on draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-23: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 15:27:09 -0000

On 6/9/15 5:04 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-23: Yes
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I would make the RFC 6365 reference normative.

Agreed.

> The ABNF definition for localpart would benefit from citing
> [draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis] by "UsernameCaseMapped profile".
> Similarly for "OpaqueString profile" in the definition of "resourcepart".
>   (And, by the way, I wouldn't put quotation marks around the profile
> names.)

Good points.

> The first paragraph of Section 3.2 defines a particular parsing order,
> which will affect a JID such as in example 15, way down below.  I think
> it's worth explicitly saying that here, to reduce the likelihood that
> such JIDs might be mis-parsed.  You do mention it in the note explaining
> example 15, but it'd be useful to highlight it here.

Yes, that would be helpful because the order does matter. I suggest:

OLD

    The domainpart of a JID is that portion which remains once any
    portion from the first '/' character to the end of the string has
    been removed (if there is a '/' character present), and then any
    portion from the beginning of the string to the first '@' character
    (if there is a '@' character present).

NEW

    The domainpart of a JID is that portion which remains once the
    following parsing steps are taken:

    1.  Remove any portion from the first '/' character to the end of the
        string (if there is a '/' character present).

    2.  Remove any portion from the beginning of the string to the first
        '@' character (if there is a '@' character present).

    This parsing order is important, as illustrated by example 15 in
    Section 3.5.

> In Section 3.3.1, I find the "i.e."s to be distracting clutter, and
> mildly recommend rendering those lines like this:
>
>        U+0022 (QUOTATION MARK): "
>        U+0026 (AMPERSAND): &

This might be confusing...

U+003A (COLON): :

So I'll change the order to:

       " U+0022 (QUOTATION MARK)

       & U+0026 (AMPERSAND)

       ' U+0027 (APOSTROPHE)

       / U+002F (SOLIDUS)

       : U+003A (COLON)

       < U+003C (LESS-THAN SIGN)

       > U+003E (GREATER-THAN SIGN)

       @ U+0040 (COMMERCIAL AT)

Peter