>>>>> "Leif" == Leif Johansson <[email protected]> writes:
>> If we're forced to break backward compatibility then we'll have
>> to evaluate whether the OID needs to change. Currently, I think
>> the answer would be no; fairly soon, I think the answer would be
>> yes. However I don't think it would be a big deal if we needed
>> to burn a few codepoints in an ABFAB mechanisms oid arc. I also
>> think it matters very little where that OID arc lives--IETF or
>> not.
Leif> So basically your vote is on an enterprise arc. I'm not sure I
Leif> understand the reasons why abfab has requirement that differ
Leif> so much from any other IETF protocol where protocol numbers
Leif> are typically allocated on publication of the RFC.
No, my vote would be on an IETF arc under the control of the WG turned
over to IANA on our disolution.
I actually think the idea of assigning codepoints on publication for new
protocols works fairly poorly for most protocols. As someone
implementing ABFAB, I will probably ship implementations before an RFC
is published. If we need to change because of a real compatibility
issue, we can do that. However, it's not work breaking backward
compatibility with deployed code just to get a nicer number.
--Sam
_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
