<inline>
Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Hartman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "tom.petch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "David Harrington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Syslog] An early last call comment on protocol-19


> >>>>> "tom" == tom petch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>     tom> Pity, I had hoped that David's compromise would be
>     tom> acceptable.  RFC4646 (the current BCP0047) is a magnificent
>     tom> piece of work and does enable the generator of text to
>     tom> specify quite precisely how it should be interpreted.  I love
>     tom> the differentiation between the dotted letter I of Azerbaijan
>     tom> and Turkey, in fact all the comments about Azerbaijani,
>     tom> Mongolian and Icelandic.
>
>     tom> What concerns me is conformance, what does it mean that a
>     tom> parameter MUST conform to this BCP or any other, an issue
>     tom> that has surfaced on this list before.  If we just changed
>     tom> the reference so that the I-D were to read "it MUST contain a
>     tom> two letter language identifier as defined in BCP0047 [13}"
>     tom> then I have no problem but this does rather negate the intent
>     tom> of the BCP.
>
> First you need to remove the two-letter restriction; language tags can be
longer than two letters,
> but besides that, this is exactly what I think you should do.
>
>     tom> The BCP defines two levels of conformance (s.2.2.9) and I
>     tom> suspect that even the lower level requires online access to
>     tom> the IANA website so what does a receiver of a syslog message
>     tom> do?  Take it as an opaque character string?  Check the ABNF?
>     tom> Do as RFC4646 specifies, for well-formed or validating
>     tom> conformance?
>
> The lower level (well-formed) does not require online access to the registry.
>
> Imho for syslog, receivers MAY|SHOULD  check that a tag is well-formed.
> That's probably best as a MAY.

Specifying in -protocol 'MAY check that a tag is well-formed' would allay my
concerns.

We still need to think about the encoding (which RFC4646 pointedly excludes).
At first sight, the existing text and ABNF about parameter values is unaffected
(UTF-8 plus escaping for PARAM-VALUE)

Tom Petch


_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

Reply via email to