IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Use of "unassigned" in IANA registries

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 17 January 2011 22:47 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 F0E6D3A6F56 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:47:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.379, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 k8oEGYb7gF5H for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:47:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B2CB43A6F52 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:47:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2011 22:49:57 -0000
Received: from p508FBCBE.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.33]) [80.143.188.190] by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 17 Jan 2011 23:49:57 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+nb2NoOLCn87n4Iaj4EFCAb5B65+6t+ET7hxGJ1p EZfeGGKwzIIDUa
Message-ID: <4D34C77F.6000500@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:49:35 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Use of "unassigned" in IANA registries
References: <201101142206.p0EM6XNB027935@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp> <06456B13-F9E5-4530-B7E8-7CF7F41000E0@muada.com> <AANLkTiksCOABzGAVqrHQzpbyROhMPVR65zsuGVe=Q6Wg@mail.gmail.com> <4D348220.10804@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D348220.10804@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: 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: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:47:26 -0000

On 17.01.2011 18:53, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The isues discussed here is the use of unassigned values in IANA
> registries. And I really agree with the authors of RFC5226 that sets
> MUST criterion for mentioning these values. Not mentioning them will
> lead to misunderstanding by IANA and other people whether the values are
> available for assignment, reserved or not used et al. So I think that
> there is just no need to discuss what is clearly set by the document.
>
> All the best,
> Mykyta Yevstifeyev

Maybe you should ask the authors of RFC 5226 whether they agree with 
your interpretation of the spec.

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email