-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Cridland [mailto:dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net]
Sent: 18 June 2008 11:39
To: debbie(_at_)ictmarketing(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk
Cc: 'John C Klensin'; iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
'Brian E
Carpenter'; 'Pete Resnick'
Subject: RE: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on
draft-klensin-rfc2821bis
On Tue Jun 17 15:50:02 2008, Debbie Garside wrote:
Not being a expert on this but having briefly read the documents in
question, I agree with Brian. This is not editorial.
Well, people have commented that changing the examples will
hardly break the Internet mail system, so it seems reasonable
to assert that the counter-argument is also true. In other
words, NOT changing the examples will also not break Internet
mail. However, I couldn't really care what the examples say,
as long as they're good, clear examples, and I think they are.
I would also add that
to go against an IETF BCP
Ah, wait - the document in question is not a missive from the
mount stating "Thou SHALT use example.net everywhere", it
says "The IETF said, 'Let there be reserved domain names for
examples'; and there were."
(I'm translating the documents into language more suitable
for the religious tracts some people appear to think they are
- at this rate, I'm fully expecting future editions to
include marginalia comencing "Once, a student asked the Postel ...")
But the facts are that nobody is "going against" the BCP. The
examples in the document don't take advantage of the
facilities provided by the BCP, but that's different.
on the grounds of "well we have done so already historically" does
not make an argument for continuing to do so;
Perhaps your implication that, irrespective of the past
behaviour, we should create such a rule is sensible...
errors
should be corrected when found, not endorsed.
... but until we do, it is not an error, and - crucially - we
should not expect nor allow the IESG to decide on a whim what
is and is not an error.
If we are to pick and choose
which RFC's/BCP's we will take notice of what is the point of
standardization?
Well, indeed, bravo, and well spoken - that's what John's
appeal is about - what's the point of having procedures and
policies at all if the IESG can say "I must reject your
document; it is purple. No purple documents on Wednesdays,
for lo, I have spoken."
You may think I'm making light of this - and I am, because I
think it's a remarkably silly stance from the IESG - but if
you can explain the difference between rejecting all purple
documents on Wednesdays and rejecting documents that do not
use RFC 2606, I'll be most grateful.
On the face of things, and with my little knowledge, I
would say that
the person within the IESG who has invoked the DISCUSS is quite
correct.
And I reckon they're talking bananas.
It doesn't matter, incidentally, whether you consider the use
of example.com to be a good idea or not. I do, although I
note that the XSF's tradition of using a fictional ".lit" TLD
with example domains taken from Shakespeare's plays is
actually considerably more readable, but anyway, I'd be
perfectly happy if the IESG made a statement that as of now,
documents which use domains other than those present in RFC
2606 will not be acceptable.
But I note that there is no such statement from the IESG, so
I'm personally not clear about whether there even is such a
policy, or upon which days of the week it applies - for all I
know, given the lack of statements made by the IESG on RFC
2606 names, these may be mandated only for purple documents
submitted on Wednesdays. And those aren't allowed, as
previously discussed. (And yeah, I know, but consider this -
if I say that the IESG say that purple documents are not
allowed on Wednesdays, that gives that equal weight with the
alledged RFC 2606 rule - the IESG has not made any statement,
we've only heard about this informally via third parties).
What matters here is whether the IESG is allowed to introduce
and enforce a rule with the same action. I do not believe
they should be allowed to.
Even on Wednesdays.
Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net -
xmpp:dwd(_at_)dave(_dot_)cridland(_dot_)net
- acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
- http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade