X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Delivered-To: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.58.181.71 with SMTP id du7csp39438vec;
        Wed, 6 Aug 2014 10:18:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.68.201.68 with SMTP id jy4mr12579912pbc.64.1407345537890;
        Wed, 06 Aug 2014 10:18:57 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from mail.ietf.org (mail.ietf.org. [4.31.198.44])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c4si685182pdk.312.2014.08.06.10.18.57
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Wed, 06 Aug 2014 10:18:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org designates 4.31.198.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=4.31.198.44;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org designates 4.31.198.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org;
       dkim=pass header.i=@ietf.org
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE941A03A0;
	Wed,  6 Aug 2014 10:18:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1;
	t=1407345536; bh=8bXTxRRdRxZDbX98waSjKGVom2+7M3oalIq389kSNQs=;
	h=From:To:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Content-ID:
	 MIME-Version:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:
	 List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:Content-Type:
	 Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender;
	b=LlIZL0iFqPoTIrJe6V8rjuKCfRbh3A4yt79G6pakp6VecZxNanmdvMW19sBi9OiUm
	 uJer+41KZuMxceTCXKzAgF4d9aj2G8Mgvr3XEjEl3ljMfu3sfmzABlaSvL0DT/LAdT
	 yz7r0uShaPnPFlO0SyeHQK8X8ENQUZM9F2eFcAnY=
X-Original-To: abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 051351A0383
 for <abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  6 Aug 2014 10:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001,
 SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
 by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id 5PR0amxroBZA for <abnf-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Wed,  6 Aug 2014 10:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 803461A037D
 for <abnf-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed,  6 Aug 2014 10:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;
 d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2358; q=dns/txt; s=iport;
 t=1407345528; x=1408555128;
 h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:
 content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version;
 bh=mBN3YBXfCv8bgopQKdqCWJ2aIi5MVVAO2fsG7kib7wM=;
 b=fRnVS8VMZ5nbhDV39YfK4T6PGemBaTDHpfzywxYTWzyEWMy3x9B9qjpm
 Djn/GAFqIKGSRts9bZARmTEF6X6ksVf7w3l5TFm7C2RtxrsVxNPTjMDHF
 3YVBZJCqRY7JtRYLW2A6DmFKgh77W7xsOrTWiB88m2WIp80oKwPO39WtD E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmcFAGti4lOtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABaDoJ/UlcEgnPJKQqHSAEZexZ3hAQBAQQBAQEgETobAgEIDgwCJgICAiULFRACBAESiEINrQCWRRMEgSyNbTqCeYFSBZwSlGWDEkJsgUY
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,813,1400025600"; d="scan'208";a="67036139"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156])
 by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Aug 2014 17:18:47 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com [173.36.12.82])
 by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s76HIlkH010793
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL);
 Wed, 6 Aug 2014 17:18:47 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.102]) by
 xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com ([173.36.12.82]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 6
 Aug 2014 12:18:47 -0500
From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, "abnf-discuss@ietf.org"
 <abnf-discuss@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [abnf-discuss] Case-sensitive string constants in ABNF?
Thread-Index: AQHPsZld36iWWJQGcU6h8If2CMSU+pvDwRQA
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 17:18:46 +0000
Message-ID: <D007BF79.583EB%jhildebr@cisco.com>
References: <53E26154.8020308@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <53E26154.8020308@alum.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.3.140616
x-originating-ip: [10.21.103.202]
Content-ID: <B2AF75D27AF1C043863E8711E40FF4F0@emea.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/abnf-discuss/0tWyZ2h6pJ2e7MOurnhXq2_z9Hk
Subject: Re: [abnf-discuss] Case-sensitive string constants in ABNF?
X-BeenThere: abnf-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "General discussion about tools,
 activities and capabilities involving the ABNF meta-language"
 <abnf-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/abnf-discuss>,
 <mailto:abnf-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/abnf-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:abnf-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:abnf-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abnf-discuss>,
 <mailto:abnf-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Sender: "abnf-discuss" <abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org>

5234 is pretty clear:

   NOTE:

      ABNF strings are case insensitive and the character set for these
      strings is US-ASCII.

   Hence:

         rulename = "abc"

   and:

         rulename = "aBc"

   will match "abc", "Abc", "aBc", "abC", "ABc", "aBC", "AbC", and
   "ABC".

      To specify a rule that is case sensitive, specify the characters
      individually.

   For example:

         rulename    =  %d97 %d98 %d99


On 8/6/14, 11:09 AM, "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>Has there ever been consideration of supporting case-sensitive string
>constants in ABNF?
>
>While the case-insensitive ones are more often than not what is needed,
>some protocol designs have places where case-sensitivity is desired. It
>is possible to accomplish this now, using numeric byte values. But it is
>hard, both to read and to write.
>
>I see no *technical* problem with supporting both kinds. The only
>questions are:
>- Is it a good idea to support both? (Or is *not* supporting them
>   intentional, to discourage case-sensitive syntaxes?)
>
>- What syntax to use in ABNF to denote the two types, while remaining
>   backward compatible.
>
>Regarding the syntax, a straightforward approach would be to define
>case-sensitive strings using a new delimiter. Single quote is a likely
>candidate since it is currently unused.
>
>Another possibility for syntax would be to allow an optional prefix on
>char-val. For example: %S"abc", %I"abc".
>
>	Thanks,
>	Paul
>
>_______________________________________________
>abnf-discuss mailing list
>abnf-discuss@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abnf-discuss
>


-- 
Joe Hildebrand



_______________________________________________
abnf-discuss mailing list
abnf-discuss@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abnf-discuss