Re: [PCN] IESG feedback from 3-in-1 encoding/ encoding comparison

Hi,

I agree with Toby that Option 1 is probably the best one to choose!

Best regards,
Georgios

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pcn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pcn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Toby Moncaster
> Sent: vrijdag 2 maart 2012 10:45
> To: pcn
> Subject: [PCN] IESG feedback from 3-in-1 encoding/ encoding comparison
> 
> Adrian Farrel is keen to find out what the WG intentions are regarding the
> "other" WG encoding drafts. Just to remind everyone, the original idea was
> to have the baseline encoding and a set of 3 experimental encodings that
> built on it. Then Bob got RFC6040 published and we decided to push 3-in-1
> encoding as the main standard. This left the other experimental encodings in
> limbo. They are:
> 
> draft-ietf-pcn-psdm-encoding-01 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcn-
> psdm-encoding-01>
> 
> draft-ietf-pcn-3-state-encoding-01 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-
> pcn-3-state-encoding-01>
> 
> These are both cited in the encoding comparison draft which poses some
> potential problems. Firstly we are not meant to refer to IDs in RFCs, secondly
> these have both long expired so will eventually disappear from any archives,
> thirdly I believe Michael may still want to use PSDM experimentally?
> 
> There would seem to be 3 possible courses of action:
> 
> 1) We ask for these to be published as historical RFCs so they can be
> referenced from encoding comparison
> 2) we ask for these to be published as experimental schemes so they can be
> referenced and can be used
> 3) we remove all reference from the encoding comparison
> 
> OPtion 1 is probably the easiest as (hopefully) they would not need too much
> updating. Option 2 requires more work on the drafts (in light of the fact we
> are obsolete RFC5696 which they both depend on), but would at least hold
> the door open to future work. Option 3 partially defeats the point of the
> encoding comparison document.
> 
> I have a very slight preference for option 1, but what do other people think?
> 
> Toby
> _______________________________________________
> PCN mailing list
> PCN@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn