tion needs to be extremely cautiously applied.
By way of trying to be practical about being practical, I'll suggest
that any IESG blocks based on a concern about pervasive monitoring needs
to reflect a consensus view of the IESG, not just the concern of a
single AD..
ces are "correct". Yet a term like "justify" encourages
this latter expectations. the view that we have far more community
clue about this topic than we currently have.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_
hould: It defines the topic and it
says the IETF considers the topic important. It calls for practices,
but doesn't -- and shouldn't -- define them.
The job of providing substantive details about IETF practices associated
with the topic will come later.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Branden
t apparently IDNits does not look there.
** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 7553
That document is a specification. This document modifies it. No matter
it's standards track status, it is a normative reference to this document.
-- Obsolete informatio
On 9/24/2018 6:16 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
+ Those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and Transport
Protocol Port Number Registry [RFC6335]"
Move the end quote after Registry.
ok. Good catch.
Interesting. Just discovered that this probably qualifies as a b
Henrik,
Thanks for the quick followup...
On 9/26/2018 1:08 PM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
I think xml2rfc does the right thing. The quotes are provided by
you, the author, not the processor, and you've enclosed the element
completely in the quotes:
yeah, sorry. played with the combinatorials
"DNS nodes names" doesn't quite scan for me. "DNS node names"
perhaps?
Section 4.2: s/simply/simplify/?
Section 5: s/in the of/in the/?
done.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
G
t
of scope for your review, can you summarize the nature of what was *in* scope?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
rdized, global schema
to the value, such as between an author and a Gateway. The
details remain invisible to the public email transfer infrastructure, but
provide addressing and handling instructions for further processing by the
Gateway. Standardized examples of such conventions are
Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
Major issues: None.
Minor issues: None.
Nits/editorial comments:
1) S3.1
s/VPIM [RFC3801] such as/VPIM [RFC3801], such as/
2) Figure 5, in the legend:
s/bpxes/boxes
cool. thanks!
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
thanks!
d/
On 1/11/2010 1:49 PM, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
Summary: This draft is ready for publication as Informational RFC.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org
scope, namely satisfying only requirements for full Internet Standard.
I believe your comment is, instead, applicable for Draft. RFC 5321 satisifed
that quite a long time ago, since it is already at Draft status.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbi
ore considerate to provide.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
point, possibly the same
language as you just used to explain it.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
isolated 'background' or 'history' discussions (and, of course, the
Updates field...)
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
ith a couple of usage examples, would go a long way towards
showing how this update helps in practical ways.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
-downgrade? That document does contain
examples and an explanation of that particular use case.
I thought Ned's goal was -- quite reasonably, IMO -- to not be dependent
upon EAI for this general-purpose enhancement.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbi
the current text is that it says 'what'
motivated the change, but not how it is useful for the intended class of
uses. The reader is left entirely to guess.
Self-actualization among the inadequately-informed invites fantasy more
than it invites utility.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
B
ggest a bit of an amalgam, including a cross reference of the
type I prefer to avoid:
1. State that this removes a restriction that was never essential.
2. State that the timing of this removal is to accomodate EAI and
for its use of the now-available features, see [RFC].
d/
--
cally have the purpose of
including extensive annotations for possible later use, attempting to
anticipate or hypothesize later editing efforts, to revise the base
document.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art ma
ignment of responsibilities to individuals, rather than aggregations
of them.
All very abstract, I admit. From the vantage point of some decades,
even quaint.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf
ly depends on whether the focus is theory or
practice. Either could make sense, but I'd intended to focus on seeing
whether actual experience is of a problem. Hence 'demonstrate'.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
“(for
example, ...)” might.
Barry, thanks.
However to the extent that there's any misunderstanding of the text by
one thoughtful, experienced reader, there's likely to be more. I've no
idea how to make it clearer or more robust, though.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg
On 1/28/2021 12:21 AM, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 19:35 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
To the extent that your intent is to say that a) this is a subset of
UTF-8, and b) multiple bytes can be used, I think that's built into the
definition of emoji-sequence.
In fact,
On 1/31/2021 2:16 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
Dave Crocker writes:
On 1/27/2021 6:32 PM, Dale Worley via Datatracker wrote:
The emoji(s) express a recipient's summary reaction to the specific
message referenced by the accompanying In-Reply-To header field.
[Mail-Fmt].
Th
On 1/30/2021 3:13 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
Finally, I think a couple of word choices could be better. So how about:
Having seen no objections, I've replaced the draft's existing text with
Ned's proposed alternative.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetW
mt]. For processing
details, see Section 3.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
rprint [13]. (in reply to end of DATA command)
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
Reporting-MTA: dns; mailout.west.internal
X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 36E2ED60
X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; dcrocker@bbiw.net
Arrival-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:30:34 -0500 (EST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; wo
28 matches
Mail list logo
