Re: [tcpm] request for feedback - proposed update to draft-touch-tcpm-experimental-options

Hi Joe,

>1. do you agree with change (A)?
>
>2. do you agree with change (B)?
>
>3. do you agree with change (C)?
>
>	if so, which variant (i), (ii), (iii)?
>
>My preference is:
>	A yes
>	B yes
>	C yes
>		first choice (i)
>		second choice (iii)
>		(I think (ii) is inelegant)

With (B) stating that multiple assignments are possible, I think C(ii) and C(iii) don't really need to be in the document. Any experiment that is notified by IANA of an experiment id collision should be free to use whatever means appear feasible to disambiguate further (such as adding 16 more bits as extended experiment id, using different length options etc.)...

Thus I support (A), (B), (C)(i)...

Best regards,

Richard Scheffenegger

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Brian Trammell
> Sent: Samstag, 16. Februar 2013 13:10
> To: Joe Touch
> Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [tcpm] request for feedback - proposed update to draft-touch-
> tcpm-experimental-options
> 
> hi Joe, all,
> 
> On 15 Feb 2013, at 20:56, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
> 
> > Here's what we need to know:
> >
> > 1. do you agree with change (A)?
> 
> yes
> 
> > 2. do you agree with change (B)?
> 
> yes
> 
> > 3. do you agree with change (C)?
> >
> > 	if so, which variant (i), (ii), (iii)?
> 
> yes. The value in our draft, in any case, is arbitrary and can be changed
> at this point with minimal experimental impact, so preserving existing
> values (at least from my viewpoint) isn't worth the relative inelegance of
> (ii).
> 
> On straight 16- vs 16-32 bit identifiers, I have noticed that scarcity in
> 16-bit number space often tends to be perceived quite early through the
> use of the space, so even if we say "no barrier to entry" now, the ability
> to expand to 32-bit numbers would make it more likely that assignments in
> this space remain zero-friction. So I'd say I prefer (iii) to (i).
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Brian
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm