Subject: Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-spencer-usefor-son-of-1036-00.txt

From: Charles Lindsey <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 14:18:12 +0100 (BST)

I am forwarding this to the Usefor WG because the drafts editor did not
spot that it belonged here. I have also put it up at
http://www.imc.org/ietf-usefor/drafts/draft-spencer-usefor-son-of-1036-00.txt.
I have been working with Henry Spencer on it over the past couple of
weeks.

The intention it to leave it here for a few days so as to let people on
this list spot any nits in it. Then it will be submitted to the RFC-Editor
as an Historic RFC which can then be properly referred to from our two
main USEFPR and USEPRO documents (which are currently in AUTH 48).

>From: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-spencer-usefor-son-of-1036-00.txt 
>Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart"
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
>Date: Mon,  4 May 2009 16:15:02 -0700 (PDT)

--NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.

	Title		: "Son of 1036":  News Article Format and Transmission
	Author(s)	: H. Spencer
	Filename	: draft-spencer-usefor-son-of-1036-00.txt
	Pages		: 91
	Date		: 2009-5-3
	
   By the early 1990s it had become clear that RFC 1036, the then
   specification for the Interchange of USENET Messages, was badly in
   need of repair. This "INTERNET DRAFT to be", though never formally
   published at that time, was widely circulated and became the de facto
   standard for implementors of News Servers and User Agents, rapidly
   acquiring the nickname "Son of 1036". Indeed, under that name, it
   could fairly be described as the best-known Internet Draft (n)ever
   published, and it formed the starting point for the recently adopted
   Proposed Standards for Netnews.

   It is being published now in order to provide the Historical
   Background out of which those standards have grown. Present-day
   implementors should be aware that it is NOT NOW APPROPRIATE for use
   in current implementations.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-spencer-usefor-son-of-1036-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

--NextPart
Content-Type: Message/External-body;
	name="draft-spencer-usefor-son-of-1036-00.txt";
	site="ftp.ietf.org";
	access-type="anon-ftp";
	directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

--NextPart
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

--NextPart--

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131            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

---

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 12:02:16 +0200

Hi Charles,

> main USEFPR and USEPRO documents (which are currently in AUTH 48).

Thanks for that work!
It is very useful to have such an historic RFC (which defines sendsys,
whogets, version, with archaeological notes on A-News, etc.).  Besides,
"Son of 1036" was a must-have!

I do not have much to say.  Having skimmed through it, the only nits I see
are typos (missing double spaces after full dots in the first two pages --
status of this memo, copyright and abstract).
I also see ". [RFC1036]" (p. 5, 16, 32, 58, 76) without a double space
and ".([RFC 977]" (page 34) without spaces at all.

I also noted in 6.5, page 42 "retrospect, , and".

I very probably have missed other things (not having read the whole draft).

It is amusing to see in the example 4.7:

    Date: Mon, 17 Jan 1994 11:14:55 -0500 (EST)

I thought there was a problem but I saw this syntax is valid and
defined in "Son of 1036":

      timezone      = "UT" / "GMT"
                    / ( "+" / "-" ) hh mm [ space "(" zone-name ")" ]

RFC 2822 (5322) does not allow "-0500 (EST)"; it is directly "(EST)",
though obsolete.

The part on transmission formats (rnews batches and encoded batches)
is not dealt with by USEFOR.  Is it totally dropped by the working group?
(Not relevant, like UUCP?)

Incidentally, the preface is pretty clear!  A great work!

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Boire du café empêche de dormir. Par contre, dormir empêche de boire
  du café. » (Philippe Geluck)

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 16:41:40 +0200

> RFC 2822 (5322) does not allow "-0500 (EST)"; it is directly "(EST)",
actually (EST) is considered a comment in 2822/5322, so it's perfectly 
legitimate.

---

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 20:57:11 +0200

Hi Harald,

> actually (EST) is considered a comment in 2822/5322, so it's perfectly legitimate.

Oh, indeed, it is the famous CFWS (Comment Folding White Space).  Thanks
for your indication.

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

---

From: "Charles Lindsey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 11:44:01 GMT

>I very probably have missed other things (not having read the whole draft).

OK, those look like Nits to fix in AUTH48.

I think I shall probably submit it to the RFC Editor tomorrow if I hear
nothing further.