IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Use of "unassigned" in IANA registries

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Tue, 18 January 2011 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5493F3A7021 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:23:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.303
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.303 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.704, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xByKOlVWuu5G for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:23:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-da01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.24]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4F43A6BD7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:23:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.fit.nokia.com (esdhcp030222.research.nokia.com [172.21.30.222]) by mgw-da01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p0IGPku0015281 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:25:48 +0200
Subject: Re: Use of "unassigned" in IANA registries
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at fit.nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-26--766835556"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <20471.1295363729@erosen-linux>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:25:44 +0200
Message-Id: <2E7AF194-C041-4239-924C-EA542CBA3F5A@nokia.com>
References: <20471.1295363729@erosen-linux>
To: erosen@cisco.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (mail.fit.nokia.com); Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:25:44 +0200 (EET)
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:23:15 -0000

On 2011-1-18, at 17:15, Eric Rosen wrote:
> The only way to avoid collisions
> due to "squatting" is to adopt a policy that all codepoint fields be large
> enough so that a significant number of codepoints are available for FCFS
> allocations.

That's certainly a suggestion we should follow for new registries, but unfortunately doesn't help us with existing ones.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email