I am looking to establish the possible answers that we have for criticality of header fields and then want to follow it up with a discussion hopefully leading to closure.
Please respond if I am missing any of the different solutions or if you think that I have all of the solutions that were discussed for the options. Also please feel free to augment the wording I have below on the description of the solution. I want to deal with pros and cons after we have the descriptions agreed on. 1. Any headers not covered by the current document generate an error. This is the current state of the document and is the all headers are critical solution. 2. Any headers not covered by the current document are ignored. This is the no headers are critical solution. 3. Headers are to be decorated in some manner to say if they are critical. There are four possible decoration methods that I have seen proposed. a) Change the field name to indicate it is critical (ala "SignTime!") b) Change the field name to indicate it can be ignored (ala "SignTime?") c) Create a header that has a list of either critical (or ignorable) field names d) Separate the non-critical header fields into a sub header 4. The core specification should ignore all issues of criticality and just define a common set of headers. It is up to the application to define which headers are critical, which can be ignored, and it can define new headers to meet it's needs. Jim _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
