IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cellar] Conversation about a NON-IANA request in Matroska

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 19 August 2021 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ACCF3A1C8C for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 13:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7KvZujaGsStG for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 13:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 052A63A1C80 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 13:01:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FBB4389A4; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 16:06:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id PbgMxCotbYsh; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 16:06:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371EC38994; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 16:06:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F46E78B; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 16:01:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
cc: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar@ietf.org>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZeE1qZ+5wLnCMFoCcvP2cf5=9Y+g5Lx3k5iqxF7gAw5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKKJt-ceukRCPUK=DTvDxDBPw-ddROX-snfZQ-BatSkgVZ0-qw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwY6V8eVG56ckhy3GFDwW61-6OD9_h=X-vDWFySM0e3B9A@mail.gmail.com> <4945.1629386506@localhost> <CAL0qLwZeE1qZ+5wLnCMFoCcvP2cf5=9Y+g5Lx3k5iqxF7gAw5g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 16:01:14 -0400
Message-ID: <22109.1629403274@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/YrE7tA3liTjeg45W7177-mxlyK0>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] Conversation about a NON-IANA request in Matroska
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 20:01:33 -0000

Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> Implementations MUST accept both in perpetuity.  (that's easy to
    >> implement, and it's an archive format, so disk files and resource
    >> forks...)
    >>
    >> Until 2025, implementations SHOULD use video/x-matroska when creating
    >> files.  After 2025, implementations SHOULD use video/matroska when
    >> creating files.
    >>
    >> (or another year sufficiently far in the future)
    >>

    > If you're going to register "x-dash" on the basis of indeterminate
    > inertia, I would argue the "dash" one isn't worth registering.

okay.

    > I would encourage something like:

    > - register "dash", indicating it is the current and the only officially
    > supported one

    > - register "x-dash", indicating that it's officially
    > deprecated and new implementations MUST NOT generate it

    > - indicate that
    > for supporting legacy implementations, all implementations SHOULD
    > accept both

    > At some point in the future if/when you are convinced nothing generates
    > "x-dash" anymore, you could do an update that turns "x-dash" into an
    > error.

That's why I suggested a transition date, so that this process could be
essentially automatic.  Readers would have some time to catch up.

If readers will never catch up, then I agree, just go with "x-dash", although
it sets a weird precedent to me.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email