Re: [lemonade] WGLC compress-02 IANA registry

[Tony Hansen <tony at att.com>]

The complexity of adding a single section to the IANA Considerations
seems pretty minimal to me. (I've written a few and didn't find them
onerous at all.)

	Tony Hansen
	tony at att.com

Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Fri Jul 21 00:56:40 2006, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>> BTW, be prepared to answer IESG why you don't want an IANA registry.
> 
> I asked Arnt about this in private mail a while back, and Arnt's
> response was that currently, there was little need for the complexity
> when we have effectively a single unencumbered candidate. (In fact, LZW
> is now out of patent, if memory serves, but implementations are fewer).
> We would, in any case, have to mandate DEFLATE support for
> interoperability purposes.
> 
> I actually think that a better way forward would be to define a distinct
> document which created the IANA registry and populated it with DEFLATE
> as the MTI, and then subsequently this document would then reference it.
> Subsequent documents providing an ESMTP analogue of this document would
> do the same.
> 
> However, the latter path is going to take longer and delay this document.


_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
lemonade at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade