Thanks for doing all this work, Jasdip. Now we have to decide what to do with all of this information.
As a first step, I think we need to submit errata to address issues with the existing RFC(s). RFC 9083 uses both "lunarNIC" and "lunarNIC_level_0". At a minimum, Andy and I agree that "lunarNIC_level_0" should be replaced with "lunarNIC". Rationale: Section 2.1 of RFC 9083 describes "lunarNIC" as an example of an identifying prefix and includes examples of this value being used as an extension prefix. Section 4.1 says "For example, if the fictional Registry of the Moon wants to signify that their JSON responses are conformant with their registered extensions, the string used might be "lunarNIC_level_0". We believe that 4.1 and 2.1 are inconsistent and that they can be made consistent by changing "lunarNIC_level_0" with "lunarNIC" in 4.1. Additional errata may be needed. If so, where, and what else needs to be done? Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
