Subject: #1334 Path and case sensitivity

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:09:08 -0700

Ralph Babel claims that path-preloading needs to be mentioned in section 5.
This may refer to security considerations; I think, however, that this 
is more likely to belong in USEPRo.

Or "send text".

WRT case sensitivity: Ralph Babel says:

 > If the path or components of it are to be treated as
 > case-insensitive, this needs to be mentioned outside
 > of a "note". Traditionally, the path and UUCP names
 > were case-sensitive; domain names are case-insensitive.
 > So we need to make clear what the status of each of the
 > individual components is.

Existing text:

   NOTE: Although case-insensitive, it is intended that the <path-
  keyword>s should be in upper case, to distinguish them from the
   <path-identity>s which are traditionally in lower case.

This refers to the idea that the path-diagnostics

  !.MISMATCH.1.2.3.4!
  !.Mismatch.1.2.3..4!
  !.mismatch.1.2.3.4!

should all be interpreted the same; when the keywords were given as ABNF 
constants (like "MISMATCH") in the ABNF grammar, this was implicit in 
the ABNF rules, and I think we've had discussions on this before without 
changing them.

Nothing here speaks to the case-sensitivity of other path components.

I suggest "no change". Comments?

                           Harald

---

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:28:04 -0700

> constants (like "MISMATCH") in the ABNF grammar, this was implicit in the
> ABNF rules, and I think we've had discussions on this before without
> changing them.

> I suggest "no change". Comments?

I think it's really annoying to have the keywords be case-insensitive from
an implementation standpoint when the rest of the Path header is
case-sensitive and has been in implementations for years.  It's probably
not a big deal, but it's annoying, and I don't see what the gain is.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([email-masked])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

---

From: "Charles Lindsey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:37:02 GMT

>not a big deal, but it's annoying, and I don't see what the gain is.

Actually, I thought the case-sensitivity or otherwise of the Path header
was very much dependent on the whim of the implementor. In our old
"article" drafts we said that comparisons might be case sensitive or not,
and that people inventing new identities should be aware of this when
choosing names. But that bit seems to have got lost, and USEFOR does not
say one way or the other (however, since we are encouraging the use of
domain-names, which are case-insensitive, people may well assume that path
entries in general are case-insensitive).

As to the keywords, it is general IETF policy that they be
case-insensitive (and Netnews has consistently broken that rule in all
sorts of cases). Whether that is an argument for breaking it again here,
or whether it is an argument for trying to get it right for once makes an
interesting question.

I would support "no change".

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: [email-masked]      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5