From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 01 2002 - 12:34:49 CST
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> Bascially, I am rather happy with it, since it accords with much of what
> we have said on this list recently. In particular, it makes provision
> for "Provisional" registrations, and thus fits in well with the
> suggestion in our current draft that those proposing new protocols
> requiring recognition by widely-deployed software should use "genuine"
> new headers right from the start, rather than starting out with
> X-headers, which may later come to be regretted (because they cannot be
> standardized).
> However, the Gods of ietf-822 are not taking too kindly to that idea
> (they mumble about achieving IETF Consensus before doing Anything). So
> if you want to influence that debate, then you better look in on
> ietf-822 and make your presence felt.
I'm with the folks on ietf-822. Provisional registrations are a bad idea;
they don't actually solve any useful problems.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>