Re: IMPORTANT: WG Last Call on NodeArchitecture Key changes

[William Studenmund <wrstuden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Oct 16, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Black_David@xxxxxxx wrote:

> Everyone,
>
> During AD Review of the NodeArchitecture key draft:
>
>       Declarative Public Extension Key for iSCSI Node Architecture
>                 draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-nodearch-key-02.txt
>
> our AD (Lars) observed that the draft is of sufficient quality and
> utility to be a standards-track RFC (i.e., be published as a proposed
> standard RFC instead of as an informational RFC).  In order to do
> that, we need to deal with the following language in Section 12.22
> of RFC 3720:
>
>    For IANA registered keys the string following X# must be
>    registered with IANA and the use of the key MUST be described
>    by an informational RFC.
>
> Similar language exists for Y# digest formats and Z# authentication
> methods.  The exclusion of experimental and standards track RFCs
> is believed to be an oversight in all three cases.

My thought when we did this was that if a key was going to be a  
proposed standard, we would not use the [XYZ]# space for it.

So rather than changing the text, why not just make the key  
"NodeArchitecture"? :-) My understanding is that existing  
implementations will (should?) react the same way to such a key as  
they would to X#NodeArchitecture (NotUnderstood), so we don't have an  
interoperation issue.

If the group wants to stick with X#, I am not opposed to changing the  
text.

Take care,

Bill
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFFM982DJT2Egh26K0RAt8NAKCJmPK0zJMPicXCdIFlsyGoIJdAdQCdEt3U
2J3Rp7umKXhf+wfDe7lmOJQ=
=mqAt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
Ips@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips