Re: [sidr] Question about manifest document

[Sandra Murphy <sandy at sparta.com>]

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009, Stephen Kent wrote:

> At 4:21 PM -0500 11/24/09, Sandra Murphy wrote:
> > > ...
> >
> >
> > Is there any reason why a more general/generic document could not be 
> > produced later, with back references to the existing document as a profile?
>
> One might try to do that, although it would be procedurally "backwards" :-).


I recognize that.  Perhaps we are not so interested in procedural purity 
than in procedural progress.

> > That presumes of course that the generalization maintains backward 
> > compatibility to the existing document.
>
>
> Profiles are more specific, so the more general manifest would be a superset
> of the RPKI manifest. Not sure if that would qualify as "backwards 
> compatible" or not.

I was projecting in the future that work on a more general manifest might 
end up not quite being a superset of the current manifest.  WG are so 
unpredictable.  Hence my statement that the development of the general 
manifest might not retain compatibility with the current document. 
Hypothesizing only.

--Sandy



> > steve