> I gather you decided to change the encoding to match some other work. But > you chose not to use a different code point when you did so. You simply > changed the meaning, without updating the published RFC.
We did not change the code point because it was decided by the working group, as I recall, that we could modify RFC 8060 with the new format from lisp-geo. > Sorry, that is squatting on and misusing a code point. The correct remedy is > for the squatter to move to use a different code point. Even if you think > there are no implementations of the code point from the RFC. (Which would be > very hard to know, since no, you don't consult to all the implementors.) This was so long ago, but we asked, and I for one, thought that was the decision. And I believe, that cisco went the same route as my implementation. Dino _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
