Agreed with reserving the code points. Even ignoring the remnants of draft
1.3, we probably should have reserved 40 when we changed it, given the
compatibility issues we found.
I don't remember enough of how 46 in draft 1.3 was used to reason about the
compatibility implications, but code points a
I do not think it's necessary to write a draft, this message from the archives
should be enough to mark the two entries as reserved.
I will forward this to the IANA track and Nick and/or Yoav can confirm.
On 12/10/20, 7:14 PM, "Martin Thomson" wrote:
Hey All,
Dry clerical stuff, sorr
Hey All,
Dry clerical stuff, sorry.
In getting an assignment for the QUIC extension to TLS, the first codepoint
IANA chose to assign was 46. In implementing this, I discovered that this was
assigned a value already in our implementation and I was unable to use that
value.
The history here is
