Given the amount of interest on the list, I prefer the "do nothing" approach.
Just add this text somewhere (maybe multiple times):
This table is (these tables are) only current as of the publication
date of RFC 4306. Other values may have been added since, or will be added
after the publication of this document. Implementors are advised to refer to
[IANA] for the latest values.
And be done with it.
Thanks,
Yaron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipsec-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Paul Hoffman
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 19:11
> To: Tero Kivinen
> Cc: IPsecme WG
> Subject: Re: [IPsec] #123: Proposal to remove the IANA tables from
> IKEv2bis
>
> At 1:25 PM +0200 11/26/09, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> >Paul Hoffman writes:
> > > - Remove the numbers from every table
> >
> >I would rather keep the numbers for those tables which are really
> >needed for implementing the protocol.
>
> And here we disagree completely.
>
> >I hate when I am implementing something and reading the RFC, and then
> >suddenly I notice that I need to go and fetch some url somewhere to
> >find the actual numbers, even worse when I am doing that in airplane
> >or similar where I do not have network connectivity...
>
> In this case, you only need to fetch a single page from IANA for all the
> tables. If you did that for any of the tables, you would have it for all
> of them.
>
> It does not feel appropriate to optimize for the case of someone coding
> IPsec without Internet access for a few hours.
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>
> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
