environment option draft

Jordan Brown <jbrown@qdeck.com> Wed, 27 October 1993 01:25 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18462; 26 Oct 93 21:25 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18458; 26 Oct 93 21:25 EDT
Received: from timbuk.cray.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04372; 26 Oct 93 21:25 EDT
Received: from hemlock.cray.com by cray.com (4.1/CRI-MX 2.19btd) id AA15346; Tue, 26 Oct 93 20:25:48 CDT
Received: by hemlock.cray.com id AA24377; 4.1/CRI-5.6; Tue, 26 Oct 93 20:25:44 CDT
Received: from cray.com (timbuk.cray.com) by hemlock.cray.com id AA24373; 4.1/CRI-5.6; Tue, 26 Oct 93 20:25:41 CDT
Received: from rockall.qdeck.com (qdeck.com) by cray.com (4.1/CRI-MX 2.19btd) id AA15340; Tue, 26 Oct 93 20:25:39 CDT
Received: from angel.qdeck.com by rockall.qdeck.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11204; Tue, 26 Oct 93 18:23:29 PDT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Jordan Brown <jbrown@qdeck.com>
To: stevea@lachman.com, telnet-ietf@cray.com
Subject: environment option draft
Cc: klensin@infoods.unu.edu
X-Mailer: ScoMail 1.0
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1993 18:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <9310261823.aa14927@angel.qdeck.com>

I must apologize for not reviewing this earlier... I trusted y'all's
competence.  I do have one relatively minor question.

> 1.  Command Names and Codes
> 
>       ENVIRON         39

Is it really wise to use the same name for this option as the one described
in 1408?  I suppose there's an advantage in that if you tweak the header
file and recompile the code you'll get the new values, but on the other
hand there's possible confusions in implementations that attempt to support
both and confusions in the output of things like protocol analyzers.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to either use a new name for the new option
or rename the option described in 1408.