As I'm glancing through the ebit draft, it occurs to me that the changes to RFC 9515 have a potentially perverse interaction with it: All new FCFS fields are now required to use the ebit.
This would include the experimental ranges. I had noted a prior set of emails last year from Ahmed when this bit of interaction occurred to me. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. But it does have the interesting property that if grow doesn't want some vendor's PEN stuck in something forever for a feature that might be popular, it means that "early adoption" from the standards point becomes almost a required thing. The WG should ponder if this is a set of properties it's really wanting and, if so, the ebit document should call it out explicitly as an interaciton with RFC 9515. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
