Re: [Captive-portals] option 160 conflict

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 2:56 AM Michael Richardson
<mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com> wrote:
>     > The issue with the 128-254 option range is that they were, originally,
>     > site-specific options (i.e., available for use within a site). However,
>     > many vendors hijacked them. And, when we reassigned much of this range
>     > to the IANA assigned options pool, the vendors failed to request a more
>     > permanent assignment for their option use. I suspect though that you
>     > are well aware of that entire process
>     > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3942).
>
>     > I don't know when Polycom decided to use this 160 option as RFC3942
>     > dates back to November 2004.
>
> This explains a lot about why we conflicted on option 160, and that perhaps
> we shouldn't have been so upset.
>

Reviving an old thread -- I was one of the people a: who was
super-annoyed by this and b: helping run the CAPPORT experiment at
IETF106, where we discovered the issue.

Having had some time to reflect on this, and with the history lesson
from Bernie, I am leaning towards the "Meh, we should just stick with
Option 160" stance...

We *could* ask for a new one in the -bis, and I suspect that e.g 169
won't be as "polluted", but I might be wrong, and it might be as bad
or worse....

Here is a random PDF of known usages -
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bbm%3A978-1-4302-2773-1%2F1.pdf
-- does anyone have a more complete list?

W

> It seems to me that DHC WG has to help IANA avoid conflicts like this in the
> future.
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Captive-portals mailing list
> Captive-portals@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf