On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 04:57:19PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote: > Apologies for the somewhat late announcement, Peter and I both had > last minute things come up and can't make it to the venue this time > around. I think we have 3 outstanding items (all of which require ML > feedback anwyay): > > o MRT draft and whether or not an IANA registry is required
Speaking as a former MRT format file coder and consumer, I'm not sure why there is any confusion about needing an IANA registry. As the current draft illustrates, a number of parties have slapped their own extensions into the format over the years. I believe the common header is sufficiently clear such that registered implementations could add their own semantics without breaking previous implementations that didn't understand a newly deifined type/subtype. (Modulo bugs, of course.) I would thus support having an IANA registry for MRT. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
