Re: [apps-discuss] possibleTrace fields registry

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 15 January 2012 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3685B21F8471 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:18:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.042
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.042 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.443, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ry2pJNhoTUIM for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:18:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B467021F8468 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:18:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 6704 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2012 20:18:39 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2012 20:18:39 -0000
Date: 15 Jan 2012 20:18:17 -0000
Message-ID: <20120115201817.34086.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4F132D04.1020003@dcrocker.net>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] possibleTrace fields registry
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:18:40 -0000

>      1.  What coordination purpose will be served by the new registry?

Unlike other headers, trace headers can occur multiple times in a
message, and their order means something.  This should be of use to
code that parses headers.

>We already have a registry to fields[1], so the 'trace' registry would be 
>redundant with a subset of the that existing registry.  Redundancy is usually bad.
>
>      2.  Why is redundancy acceptable, here?

I suppose that adding a trace flag to the existing registry would do the trick.

R's,
John