ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Fw: requested tweak to 2822upd grammar - consensus call

2008-09-28 00:06:50

Pete, the original request to add msg-id-kernel came from Alexey. When I
asked for a consensus call, Alexey's message was this:

Alexey Melnikov wrote:
I realize that this might be too late now, but I've suggested this
before and got no response. And I hope this is not controversial for
AUTH48:

Can we please redefine the msg-id in section 3.6.4:

msg-id          =   [CFWS] "<" id-left "@" id-right ">" [CFWS]

to be:

msg-id          =   [CFWS] "<" msg-id-core ">" [CFWS]
msg-id-core     =   id-left "@" id-right

This way other documents can reference the thing inside <> more
easily.

The outcome from the consensus call was that 1) it should only be done
if it did not perturb AUTH48, and 2) if it's done, its name should be
msg-id-kernel instead of msg-id-core. At the time, you indicated a
willingness to do it as part of AUTH48.

If you're now uneasy about doing it, that's fine: don't do it. **It's
not worth slowing things down at this point.**

        Tony

Pete Resnick wrote:

On 9/26/08 at 9:55 AM -0400, Tony Hansen wrote:

From what I understand, the definitions of id-left and id-right that
msg-id-core refers to are slightly different between usefor and 5322
(nee 2822upd).

That's true, but I don't see what difference that makes. The usefor
document can redefine whatever it likes (including id-left and
id-right). There's no harm if 5322 defines:

msg-id-core = id-left "@" id-right

Please someone, explain the objection to using msg-id-core. Otherwise, I
see no reason not to use it.

The argument espoused is that adding msg-id-kernel allows that
internal portion of the msg-id to be used by people in other
documents; as 5322 stands, that's not possible.

Do we have an example of someone wanting to use this?

Also, does adding it also mean that we should remove the last sentence
of 3.6.4? "Semantically, the angle bracket characters are not part of
the msg-id; the msg-id is what is contained between the two angle
bracket characters."

This change is making me increasingly worried. Are we sure we want to do
this?

pr