Re: [netmod] consensus all: timezone-location and draft-ietf-netmod-iana-timezones-03

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:40:42PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 05:45:32PM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > > 
> > > I think you do have a valid point.  It is probably be better to have
> > > one fixed version of the enumeration standardized.  But the problem is
> > > how this module would be maintained.  Apparently the database changes
> > > too often for being maintained in RFCs.  And there also seems to be
> > > a political dimension to it that I don't think we are prepared to
> > > handle.  And if we simply publish an RFC with the current version of
> > > the names from the database, what does it mean that the
> > > IANA-maintained db differs?
> > > 
> > 
> > I completely fail to understand which value an RFC with an almost
> > immediately outdated list of TZ names has.
> 
> I don't think it is "immediately outdated".  Locations are rarely added and
> removed.

The numbers I recall indicate a certain chance it comes out of the
whole process already outdated. But even if it takes a year, the value
is rather questionable.
 
> > I would then rather prefer
> > to code my manager to use my local list and be prepared that names can
> > be rejected.
> 
> I expect this to work reasonably well in practice.  But the point is
> that you don't know if a value will be accepted or not.

So what? I believe we will see other leaf where you can't predict for
100% that the value will be accepted. If we continue to strive for a
perfect world, we will never ever achieve anything. I really doubt
setting the timezone name is the biggest interoperability problem to
solve.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>