Another misconception: For all I know, IEEE documents are generally available for free 6 months after the publication. Cheers, Pascal > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: lundi 8 avril 2019 19:10 > To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: int-dir@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; its@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over- > 80211ocb.all@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-34 - > KeyWords BCP 14 text > > > Le 04/03/2019 à 12:24, Pascal Thubert a écrit : > > Reviewer: Pascal Thubert > > Review result: Not Ready > > > [...] > > BCP 14 text: > > > > Suggest to use this text: > > “ > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL > NOT", > > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", > "MAY", and > > "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp14 https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp14 > > [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119][RFC8174] when, and only when, they > > appear in all capitals, as shown here. > > > > “ > > I will add it, thank you. I want to be up to date with most recent specs. > > But here are my worries about it for what is worth: > > - I dont understand though why the need to say 'capitals' when in CAPITALS is > it written. > > - I thought that a BCP document was just one RFC. Here we seem to be talking > about BCP-14 being both RFC2119 and RFC8174. > > A google search on BCP-14 hits first on RFC 2119, and a document called > 'bcp14' (not on RFC8174). https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp14 > > The second hit is a page at RFC Editor which points to a "Canonical URL" > towards https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14.txt which does not talk about > RFC8174 either. > > It then points to https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/ref-bcp14.txt > That ref points back to a web page telling the "Canonical URL". > > - finally, the text ends with 'as shown here', which invites my reading to think > that what follows needs to be understood with these capitals. > And what follows is the definition of terms like "IP-OBU", etc. That is > worrisome. You can understand the worry if you read it as a whole: > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", > "MAY", and > > "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP > > 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all > > capitals, as shown here. > > > > IP-OBU (Internet Protocol On-Board Unit): an IP-OBU is a computer > > situated in a vehicle such as an automobile, bicycle, or similar. It > > has at least one IP interface that runs in mode OCB of 802.11, and > > that has an "OBU" transceiver. See the definition of the term "OBU" > > in section Appendix I. > > The dot after 'here' is very important, but so small. A quick or low-sighted > reader may see it as double dots. And that would be a problem, because the > "IP-OBU" term definition is not suject to that capitalization. > > Alex
