Hi, You have an impressive Implementation Status section. Well done for compiling this and keeping it up to date.
I note that a number of IANA assignments are marked as TBA while others have been assigned from the First Come First Served part of the registry. This leads me to two things: 1. Could you tweak the IANA considerations section to reflect the actual requests. For the code points that have already been assigned, I think the action you are requesting is that IANA simply update the reference to point to this document's RFC number when it is published. 2. What does the non-assignment of some of the code points tell us about the implementations? Have they squatted on code points? Do they stand a chance of interoperating? Have they not implemented part of the document? 3. That second point leads me to wonder how fully-scoped the implementations are. Are there elements of the document that everyone has implemented? Are there parts that no one has implemented? Part of the reason for 7942 is to help understand the robustness of the specification, and (of course) the absence of implementation of some aspects might mean that they are less well proven, and possibly even unwanted. 4. Is there any reason to not request First Come First Served assignment of the remaining code points? Cheers, Adrian _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
