On 23/04/2017 12:58, Daniel Margolis wrote:
Thanks. Comments inline, mostly ticking off changes. :)
I have pushed all my changes in response to this to the git repo and
they should appear in our next draft.
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Alexey Melnikov
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
[snip]
8) If you want to allow for extensibility, you probably need an
IANA registry of fields allowed, so that developers can find them
easily. I can help with some text.
I'd appreciate any suggestions.
Is there a need for that now, though? I would not want to overengineer
this, either. :)
All IETF documents are required to have the "IANA Considerations"
section. IANA will manage registries if they are created by an RFC.
If you know that a particular protocol or format field is going to be
extensible, it is much better to define a registry now than be forced to
create one in a hurry later on.
So just create an issue for this (if you haven't already). I can help
with some text.
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
