Re: [lemonade] WGLC draft-ietf-lemonade-compress-02.txt

[Randall Gellens <randy at qualcomm.com>]

At 4:02 PM -0700 7/28/06, Philip Guenther wrote:

> > >   BTW, be prepared to answer IESG why you don't want an IANA registry.
> >
> >  May as well say clearly in the document that "deflate is the only 
> > currently defined mechanism.  Additional mechanisms are not 
> > expected to be required, but if so can be created by future RFCs 
> > which extend this document."
>
>  For consistency, I suggest copying the text that the SORT/THREAD 
> doc, draft-ietf-imapext-sort-17.txt, uses to describe the 
> extensions and the registries.  To quote parts of that doc's 
> Introduction and IANA Considerations sections:
>      A server which supports the THREAD extension indicates this with one
>      or more capability names consisting of "THREAD=" followed by a
>      supported threading algorithm name as described in this document.
>      This provides for future upwards-compatible extensions.
>  ...
>      This document creates a new [IMAP] threading algorithms registry, which
>      registers threading algorithms by publishing a standards track or IESG
>      approved experimental RFC.  This document constitutes registration of
>      the ORDEREDSUBJECT and REFERENCES algorithms in that registry.


Sorry for not being clear: I don't think we need an IANA registry, 
because we don't expect to define future mechanisms.  If we find that 
we do need other mechanisms, we can define those in new RFCs that 
extend this one.
--
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
He had occasional flashes of silence that made his conversation
perfectly delightful.                            --Sydney Smith

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