ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Use of LWSP in ABNF -- consensus call

2007-05-16 09:26:59

On May 15, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:

Tony Hansen said:
I share your concerns about removing rules that are already in use --
that would generally be a bad thing.  However I'm interested in the
consensus around whether a warning or a deprecation statement would be a
good thing.

LWSP has a valid meaning and use, and its being misapplied somewhere
doesn't make that meaning and usage invalid. I could see a note being
added. However, anything more than that is totally inappropriate.

+1

Frank's text in
<http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg46048.html>
would be fine:

  Authors intending to use the LWSP (linear white space) construct
  should note that it allows apparently empty lines consisting only
  of trailing white space, semantically different from really empty
  lines.  Some text editors and other tools are known to remove any
  trailing white space silently, and therefore the use of LWSP in
  syntax is not recommended.

However, it doesn't belong in "security considerations".

Discarding of lines is likely in response to some type of exploit. The consideration for not using LWSP would be in regard with how security requirements may create incompatibilities. This is the correct section.


What about moving LSWP, and this text, to a separate section of Annex B:
"B.3 Deprecated constructs"?

Agreed. That would also be appropriate.

Another problem regarding LWSP is in regard to _many_ differing definitions. A profusion of differing definitions alone becomes a valid reason to deprecate the mnemonic. This definition represents a poor practice as related to security which should not be facilitated through standardization. By removing this problematic construct, better solutions are more likely to be found. At least (ab)use of the mnemonic will have been discouraged. Any continued use of this mnemonic should be discouraged and the note added should clarify one of the reasons for this mnemonic being deprecated is specifically due to its varied and checkered meanings in other drafts.

-Doug




_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf