Re: AD review of draft-ietf-ipv6-compression-nego-v2

[James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com>]

Jari Arkko writes:
> > I know of no reason to refer to the old 2023 assignment of 004f.
> >   
> For the purposes of pointing people to the right spec for implementing
> or understanding something, there is no reason to refer to 2023.
> 
> For the purposes of knowing which numbers have been allocated, reference
> to 2023 might be useful.

Once this RFC is published, it'll be immutable even if new compression
mechanisms are later defined.  That means that any list it provides is
at best a hint that there are other documents to read, and can't serve
(as the IANA reference is supposed to) as a definitive list of
protocol numbers.

If we're going to provide "helpful" references -- all that we can do
-- I think it'd be most helpful to include just the ones that
currently have some meaning.  As I don't think 004f has any real
meaning, and no implementor reading this document should be attempting
an implementation of it, I think losing that one reference would be a
step in the right direction.  It serves only to send readers off into
the weeds.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------