The primary purpose of this compromise is to unjam the many requests for code points that otherwise clog the WG and expert review process. I believe it will at least do that.
-Ekr On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Benjamin Kaduk <bka...@akamai.com> wrote: > Well, "most people [in the world" do not care about any documents the > IETF puts out. I am not sure what population of people you are actually > trying to make a statement about. > > I am not confident that adding this column will actually have a useful > impact, but I think the experiment is worth performing. > > -Ben > > On 03/31/2016 12:08 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > > In essence you are saying that most people are not going to care about > > the Y/N in the IANA table anyway. Somewhat similar to people not > > understanding the difference between the different types of RFCs. > > > > That sounds pragmatic. > > > > Ciao > > Hannes > > > > On 03/31/2016 06:52 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > >> On 03/31/2016 11:20 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > >>> Hi Ben, > >>> > >>> just think about the mentioned JPAKE extension: what type of deployment > >>> can you expect? It is something that Thread decided to use. Will > Thread, > >>> as a mesh networking technology, be successful and widely be deployed? > >>> We don't know yet but if it becomes a technology of choice for use with > >>> IEEE 802.15.4 then it will be fairly widely used in the IoT sector. I > am > >>> sure the authors of the Thread specifications (and the members of the > >>> Thread consortium) expect their stuff to be widely used (in IoT -- not > >>> on the Web). > >> Well, for JPAKE in particular, my thoughts focus on my perception that > >> PAKE of any form is not really central to what TLS does. Given that, I > >> personally would not advocate for a 'Y' for it, even knowing that it > >> might see wide use in IoT. > >> > >>> Is this something that is good enough for this group? Web guys will > >>> hardly care about it. A large part of the TLS group is focused on the > >>> Web use only (at least that's my impression). > >>> > >>> From the descriptions provided by Sean I don't know whether this is > >>> something that would be a "Y" blessing or not. This is what I call > >>> "sounds nice but ...". > >>> > >> Well, I would expect the authors to put the 'Y' in their IANA > >> considerations text and see if anyone complained during the last calls. > >> I further expect that some of the web-centric folks on this list would > >> complain and probably get the 'Y' removed, but I am not seeing why this > >> is problematic. > >> > >> -Ben > >> > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
