[Idr] Re: Last Call: 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers' to Informational RFC (draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation)

The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
> the following document:
> 
> - 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers '
>    <draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation-01.txt> as an Informational
> RFC

   While I entirely agree with the author that using ":" to separate the
high-order 16 bits from the low-order 16 bits would be a bad idea, I'm
not confident that using "." would be problem-free.

   The draft already mentions possible confusion with floating-point
numbers; I also see possible confusion in searching.

   Before trying to designate a "standard" representation, IMHO, we should
make sure there's a problem to be solved, and consider how likely our
"solution" is to prevail.

   And there's a particularly obvious alternative: simply continuing the
decimal notation used now. We've already adapted to five-digit decimal
numbers without a whimper: is there really any reason to believe six
digits will prove unworkable?

--
John Leslie <john@jlc.net>

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr