At 03:21 13-08-2008, Bert Wijnen \(IETF\) wrote:
John Klensin has proposed new text, whcih was amended by
Ted Hardie and the resulting text (if I understood it correctly) is:
"6. Addresses used in I-Ds SHOULD use fully
qualified domain names (FQDNs) instead of literal IP
addresses. Working Groups or authors seeing exemptions from
that rule MUST supply the rationale for IP address use
with inline comments (e.g., "Editor's note:" or "Note
in Draft:" that can be evaluated by the IESG and
the community along with the rest of the document. Example
domains in pseudo-code, actual code segments, sample
data structures and templates, specifically including MIB
definitions and examples that could reasonably
be expected to be partially or entirely copied into
code, MUST be drawn from the list reserved for documentary
use in BCP32 (RFC 2606 or its successors). It is
generally desirable for domain names used in other I-D
discussion contexts to be drawn from BCP32 as well, if only
as an act of politeness toward those who might be using
the domains for other purposes at the time of publication
or subsequently. Working groups or editors who
are convinced that different names are required MUST
be prepared to explain and justify their choices and
SHOULD do so with explicit inline comments such as
those described above."
From the discussion on the list (that I have seen), people seem to
be OK with that text. It is quite a bit longer, but so be it.
Does anyone have objections to the above text as replacement for
the current text?
The proposed text is about a specific exception. It might be better
to have a more general exemption than one that covers Item 6 only.
I suggest using the following:
6. Addresses used in I-Ds SHOULD use fully qualified domain names
(FQDNs) instead
of literal IP addresses. Example domains in pseudo-code, actual code
segments, sample data structures and templates, specifically including MIB
definitions and examples that could reasonably be expected to be
partially or
entirely copied into code MUST be drawn from the list reserved for
documentary
use in BCP 32.
9. Exemptions
It is recommended that Working Groups or authors seeking exemptions from the
ID-Checklist explain the rationale with inline comments. (e.g.,
"Editor's note:"
or "Note in Draft:" that can be evaluated by the IESG and the IETF
community along
with the rest of the document.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf