On 2007-06-13 16:37, Jari Arkko wrote:
Phillip,
My personal view is that we should develop an Internet architecture that allows
an infinite number of new protocols to be deployed without consumption of
scarce resources, i.e. port numbers of DNS RRs.
...
So in summary, the IAB should be charged with identifying the set of finite
resources that IANA assigns and propose an Internet architecture in which
deployment of new application layer protocols does not cause any of the finite
resources to be depleted.
I'm definitely in favor of improving the situation. And for applications
protocols this is probably an easier problem to begin with. And as
I said in the previous e-mail, as far as I know, most new work uses
field sizes and types that have less scarcity.
However, the Internet runs to a large extent on protocols that were
designed decades ago, and some of those protocols have number
spaces that are very finite. I don't want to run out of protocol
numbers, DHCP message types, etc.
Exactly. There are very tight namespaces where we need to apply pretty
strict rules to avoid hitting a brick wall, but nobody can disagree that
we should design to avoid creating new brick walls.
But in the namespaces where there is no brick wall, there are nevertheless
reasons to be careful. I'd suggest that people should not only look
at the text of 2434bis, but also at RFC 4775 and at
draft-carpenter-extension-recs-02.txt. Comments on the latter are very
welcome.
I don't believe we should do anything that can be interpreted as condoning
misappropriation of IANA-assigned values. But I do agree with John Klensin
that when something is in actual use, that fact should be recognized,
and registered with a factual comment. That helps interoperability even
if it offends our formalities.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
