At 2:05 PM -0600 9/2/04, Alex Rousskov wrote:
I would be happy to create an example, probably using a real entry
from OCP/HTTP profile. Where should I send it once it is discussed
by the WG?
iana(_at_)iana(_dot_)org, cc'ing me would be great; thanks.
Also, is there an available validator for PETDM, or is this
something the expert will validate?
I doubt PETDM is formal[ized] enough to automate validation. If
PETDM happens to be useful, we probably would be able to judge
whether further fomalization makes sense. For now, it is just a
semi-formal mnemonic requiring human interpretation. Expert
validation would be required.
Okay.
On the ABNF issue, if there is a different flavor of BNF which can
express the "n octets" rule, we can switch the reference; the IESG
doesn't mind folks using different flavors of notation, it just
needs the citations to match. If there is no flavor of BNF that
matches, we can say "expressed in ABNF, except for the "n octets
rule"", which is a kludge, but will probably work.
I do not know of any *BNF that allows dynamic rules (other than via
comments). Moreover, since *BNF notations vary, simply switching
references will most likely not be possible. How about replacing the
offending
data = size ":" <n>OCTET ; n == size
rule with ABNF compliant
data = size ":" *OCTET ; exactly size octets
rule. This change can be done via Editor Note, I think. Would that work?
Thank you,
Alex.
I think it could be done via an editor note, if the wg is okay with the change.
regards,
Ted Hardie
At 9:46 AM -0600 9/2/04, Alex Rousskov wrote:
FYI: It looks like we need to wait another IESG telechat cycle
since Steve Bellovin excersized a "Defer" option to review the
latest draft changes (published in May). Steve's DISCUSS is the
last DISCUSS we need to clear.
FWIW, ID Tracker description of "Defer" says that it can only be
invoked the first time the document comes up for discussion during
a telechat. Since this is the second telechat for OCP Core, I am
guessing that the rule applies to each revision of the document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_state_desc&id=21
There is also a new problem recorded by Bill Fenner (without the
corresponding DISCUSS): OCP Core syntax cannot be fully expressed
using ABNF. ABNF cannot express an "n octets" rule where "n" is
determined dynamically.
Since it is not a DISCUSS, I would leave the BNF "as is" because
the offending rule is essentially a free-flow comment (from ABNF
point of view), and we have no better way of expressing this,
short of extending ABNF.
Alex.
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, The IESG wrote:
'State Changes to IESG Evaluation - Defer from IESG
Evaluation::AD Followup by Steve Bellovin'
ID Tracker URL:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=10380&rfc_flag=0