IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB Data Channel: Usage of PPID for protocol multiplexing

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 06 February 2014 23:20 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F41811A0511 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 15:20:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.344
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.344 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=no
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 Lb8CtkrMr3vD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 15:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (unknown [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCEA1A0426 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 15:20:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F8BC7C4A9D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 00:19:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xwa8R315Gc27 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 00:19:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [172.19.7.58] (unknown [216.239.45.90]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A04BD7C4A53 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 00:19:58 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52F4189B.3020309@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 00:19:55 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D15E955@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <74072016-DA11-41E8-9944-779428163EE4@lurchi.franken.de> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D15ED94@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <4CE22DF8-DE34-400A-95AE-2E011828DE88@lurchi.franken.de> <52F3B7A5.6070105@alum.mit.edu>, <3B7B334C-868A-4128-B7BF-07C66B649443@lurchi.franken.de> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D160930@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>, <D5AE9FDB-77D9-422A-B995-C4BF299D9DE0@lurchi.franken.de> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D160A98@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <75145993-7226-4C5D-845C-A96D51D3D68B@lurchi.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <75145993-7226-4C5D-845C-A96D51D3D68B@lurchi.franken.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB Data Channel: Usage of PPID for protocol multiplexing
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 23:20:02 -0000

On 02/06/2014 09:47 PM, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2014, at 9:35 PM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>>>>> I hope that if values are retained simply for backward compatibility they are explicitly marked as deprecated.
>>>>> My plan was just not to defined what they are used for...
>>>> I would like to have some explanation text. Having registered values without any kind of explanation is not a good approach, in my opinion.
>>> The reason why I registered them is that they are used by Firefox and there was
>>> the possibility that the PPID based fragmentation and reassembly got
>>> standardised. I wanted to avoid the case that Firefox uses some values
>>> and other protocols register these values. That would have been pretty
>>> bad. Since they are a very cheap resource, I just went ahead and "saved"
>>> the values.
>> That is a all good. But, when people wonder 5 years from now, I don't want them to have to look for this e-mail in oder to get an explanation :)
> Understood. But do you think they walk through the IANA registry? I would expect them
> to read RFCs and follow the procedures described there.

Updating the registry to read "Obsolete; was used by <draft name>"
should satisfy all comers.

People do read registries.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email