Subject: Re: Last Call issues on USEPRO

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:53:55 -0800

"Charles Lindsey" <[email-masked]> writes:

>> **#1584 **USEPRO LC 3.2.1: Adding Injection-Date at posting agent

> #1584 also needs to be addressed, but Russ seems to agree that my
> suggested wording is needed, or something like it, so it is just a
> matter of rubber-stamping or otherwise by the WG.

Can you remind me of what your suggested wording is here?  I just finished
spending two weeks and change at the coast ignoring computers, and I'm
afraid a lot of this has fallen out of my head.

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

---

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:11:27 -0800

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]> writes:

> *#1582** USEPRO LC 4.3 / 5.2.3: 4.3 overlooks chkscope

Resolved but not yet published, as mentioned in the other message.

> **#1583** USEPRO LC 5.2.3: Checkgroups control messages

There are several individual questions here.

One is handling of subhierarchies in combination with groups with the same
name as the hierarchy.  I generally agree with Charles here that there
isn't a better way of handling the edge case than what we currently have,
and the group at the top of the sub-hierarchy will have to be listed in
the parent checkgroups.

Another is the serial number.  I think there are two viable options here:
unlimited-length serial numbers (the current text) or sequence-space
arithmetic.  I lean mildly towards the current text just because I don't
want to have to write the text for sequence-space arithmetic, and I find
persuasive the argument that unlimited-length numbers can be checked with
ASCII comparison and don't need to be treated as numbers.

Another is what should be done with a checkgroups that doesn't have a
serial number when checkgroups for that hierarchy previously did have a
serial number.  I think this is a gap in the current specification.

The last is whether there's a means to reset the serial number.  Currently
there isn't.

It may be worth splitting this point into four issues; the first and the
last may already be resolved, depending on whether anyone wants to
advocate doing something different about them than what we have now.

> I also have a couple of USEPRO issues in the tracker that don't seem to
> have been formally closed (another error by the chair, sorry 'bout
> that):

> 1412    USEPRO 5.3: Cancel newsgroups: matching

I remain opposed to this change.  I think we need a consensus ruling from
a chair on it.  I don't believe that it has consensus, but I'm biased by
being opposed, so I shouldn't judge that.

> 1413    USEPRO 5.5: ihave/sendme syntax

This is resolved.

> 1414    USEPRO 3.2.1: delimiter for multiple Path identities

This is resolved.  The first text option in that ticket is in the current
draft.

> 1415    USEPRO 3.2.1 - Number of path entries per site

Still open.  I think this needs a consensus ruling.  I don't believe the
proposed change is necessary, since for the purposes of the protocol
multiple systems within an ISP can be considered as one news server and
what happens internally is a black box.

> 1417    USEPRO 3.4: Injecting-agent modification of message-ID

This is resolved with the text mentioned in the ticket.

> 1479    USEPRO: Whether moderators SHOULD retain message-ID

Currently, we say:

            <t>Moderators are encouraged to retain the Message-ID header
            field if it is valid, and also retain the Date header field
            unless it appears to be stale (72 hours or more in the past)
            for reasons understood by the moderator (such as delays in the
            moderation process) in which case they MAY substitute the
            current date.  Any Injection-Date, Injection-Info, or Xref
            header fields already present MUST be removed.</t>

The question is whether the encouragement should be normative.  This is
still open.

> 1482    USEPRO 3.2: Possibility to use non-resolvable domain name as
> path-identity

This is currently permitted by:

            <t>A fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) within a domain
            affiliated with the administrators of the agent and guaranteed
            to be unique by the administrators of that domain.  For
            example, the uniqueness of server.example.org could be
            guaranteed by the administrator of example.org even if there
            is no DNS record for server.example.org itself.</t>

The proposal is to say that this is a SHOULD NOT in at least some cases
(the specific case cited is using foo.com when only news.foo.com exists in
DNS).  Currently, we only say that it's not preferred.  This is still
open.

---

From: Thorfinn <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:08:48 +1100

> and the group at the top of the sub-hierarchy will have to be listed  

Sounds workable to me.  Not the nicest solution, but I can't think of  
any more correct way to do it.

> ASCII comparison and don't need to be treated as numbers.

That was my argument. :-)  ( strlen(a, b) || strcmp(a, b) ) is  
perfectly sensible as a serial number comparator, assuming trimming of  
any leading zeroes and whitespace and validation that the rest of the  
string is digits.  Not sure if we have some kind of notes-to-the- 
implementor, but that may be worth putting in as such a note.

> serial number.  I think this is a gap in the current specification.

Once you've accepted a serial number checkgroups, I think that you're  
stuck with serial numbers, and non-serial checkgroups should be  
ignored.  Anything else seems to me to suffer the same issue as reset  
messages below - there's no real way to definitively determine that  
you're somehow supposed to stop caring about serial numbers.

I don't know if any extra wording is required to achieve that.  If so,  
it should probably be added.

> The last is whether there's a means to reset the serial number.   

Not really an issue if you go with either unlimited length or sequence  
space arithmetic as the options for serial number.  Neither of them  
require a means to reset the serial number - and in fact in both cases  
it's most likely counterproductive to have such a mechanism, since  
there is no way to guarantee that any reset message is delivered.

> advocate doing something different about them than what we have now.

Well, my comments above. :-)  I have nothing to say on the other issues.

Meep,

   Thorf

-- 
<a href="http://tertius.net.au/~thorfinn/">[email-masked]</a>
~/ For those who've come across the seas, ~/ We've boundless plains to  
share, ~/
~/   With courage let us all combine,     ~/    To Advance Australia  
Fair.    ~/
      -- The end of the second verse of the Australian National  
Anthem. --

---

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:37:53 +0100

Charles Lindsey wrote:
> In <[email-masked]> Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>   
>> At long last, I've gotten around to doing what should have been done in 
>> September: Collate the list of Last Call comments.
>>     
>
>   
>> The following were raised as ISSUEs, and have been assigned issue numbers:
>>     
>
>   
>> **#1585 **USEPRO LC : Length and final dots of newsgroups descriptions
>>     
>
> You are missing:
>
> Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:06:35 GMT
> Subject: Re: ISSUE: treatment of POSTED in proto articles
>   
Yes - it did not have ISSUE at the start of the subject line, so I took 
it as a comment. Will add.
> Which I think is the major item oustanding. Russ agrees that a current
> MUST ought to be reduced to SHOULD, but I would prefer to reduce it beyond
> that, so further opinions are needed.
>   
> suggested wording is needed, or something like it, so it is just a matter
> of rubber-stamping or otherwise by the WG.
>
> I think the others are now fixed.
>
>

---

From: "Charles Lindsey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:05:16 GMT

>it as a comment. Will add.

Yes, it was a followup to an earlier message, and I did not edit the
Subject line thoroughly enough :-(.

-- 
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