Subject: [sidr] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:00:41 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-slurm/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Please cite BCP 14 rather than RFC 2119, assuming you intend for normative
keywords to have their normative meaning in uppercase only.

---

From: Di Ma <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 22:33:08 +0800

Alissa,

Thanks very much for your comments.

Is BCP 14 exactly the same document as RFC 2119?

Di

> 在 2018年4月5日，02:00，Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]> 写道：
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 10:06:48 -0500

Hi, Di,

> Is BCP 14 exactly the same document as RFC 2119?

It was, until  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8174 was added to BCP 14.
That's the process doc that says readers don't have to figure out whether
"must" is normative, etc.

Spencer, who is not Alissa, but had a second to answer the question

---

From: Di Ma <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 23:27:09 +0800

Spencer,

Thanks for your explanation. 

Di

> 在 2018年4月6日，23:06，Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]> 写道：
> 
> Hi, Di,
> 
> It was, until  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8174 was added to BCP 14. That's the process doc that says readers don't have to figure out whether "must" is normative, etc.
>

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:28:38 -0500

> On Apr 6, 2018, at 10:06 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Di,
> 

Also not Alissa (or Spencer), but to extend the answer a bit: RFC 8174 includes new boilerplate for treating only the upper case versions as keywords.

Thanks!

Ben.

---

From: Di Ma <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 15:54:01 +0800

Hi, Ben,

Thanks for reminding us:-)

Di

> 在 2018年4月10日，02:28，Ben Campbell <[email-masked]> 写道：
> 
> 
>