IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Fri, 31 January 2014 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0CB1A03CC for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:40:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.436
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NFiFtH330iIv for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [109.74.15.94]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736A71A0292 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [193.12.32.88]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 087F7240C58A; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:40:43 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:40:42 +0100
Message-Id: <20140131.214042.353989959.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140131202620.GB31150@elstar.local>
References: <0B4780F9-FC24-4D8E-8F9E-BE5D2E55B2FB@nic.cz> <20140131.174532.535193369.mbj@tail-f.com> <20140131202620.GB31150@elstar.local>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5rc2 on Emacs 23.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netmod-chairs@tools.ietf.org, netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] consensus all: timezone-location and draft-ietf-netmod-iana-timezones-03
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 20:40:48 -0000

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> 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.

> 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.


/martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email