[Insipid] Proposal for Backwards Compatibility Session-ID

[James Polk <[e-mail]>]

INSIPID

I wrote a draft on way around our backwards compatibility issues 
between kaplan implementations and jones/insipid implementations, 
such that jones/insipid implementations advertise their adherence 
with a to-be standards-track RFC from this WG.

There are a couple of choices we as a WG need to make in this 
proposal. Namely, at the bottom of section 3 is an alternative choice 
for all jones implementations to continuously advertise they are 
jones implementations, even when communicating with kaplan 
implementations. The Session-IDs in call flows in section 3.1 and 3.2 
will be affected by this choice.

As of now, I decided not to include this alternative throughout the 
rest of the ID, because I felt like having two ways to accomplish the 
goal of backwards compatibility would be confusing to the WG. ;-)

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-insipid-bkwds-compatibility-proposal-02.txt

I'm already to the -02 rev because I found little mistakes in the -00 
and -01 (which were submitted earlier this afternoon).

Comments are welcome.

The goal of this draft is to come to agreement and interweave that 
agreement in the INSIPID solution draft. Right now, this draft is not 
intended to become an RFC.

James