[Ltru] Re: Suggested text for future compatibility of registry processors.

"Doug Ewell" <dewell@roadrunner.com> Sat, 14 July 2007 23:19 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I9qtA-0005oN-Hq; Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:19:00 -0400
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1I9qt9-0005oH-DN for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:18:59 -0400
Received: from [] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I9qt9-0005o9-30 for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:18:59 -0400
Received: from mta15.adelphia.net ([]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I9qt8-0006UG-OT for ltru@ietf.org; Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:18:58 -0400
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([]) by mta15.adelphia.net (InterMail vM. 201-2131-123-105-20051025) with SMTP id <20070714231809.NBUB16178.mta15.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:18:09 -0400
Message-ID: <011d01c7c66d$3dbe3900$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <E1I9ghp-0006L9-0h@megatron.ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 16:18:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22
Subject: [Ltru] Re: Suggested text for future compatibility of registry processors.
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

Addison Phillips <addison at yahoo dash inc dot com> wrote:

> While catching up on my backlog I notice the following note from Mark.
> I would note that we already have a shorter equivalent of this text at 
> the end of 3.1.2, where it says:
> --
> Future versions of this document might add additional fields to the 
> registry, so implementations SHOULD ignore fields found in the 
> registry that are not defined in this document.
> --
> This text was apparently added back in draft-02. Any reason to edit it 
> some more?

This is fine, and the right thing to do for 4646bis, but the point still 
remains that this wording isn't in place for the current spec, RFC 4646, 
and so adding new fields will break strictly 4646-conformant processors 
in the same way that converting the Registry to UTF-8 will.  Note that I 
didn't say either change is a bad thing, or unjustified.

Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14

Ltru mailing list