h...@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) writes:
Barry Leiba writes:
OK, I now recognise a culture clash as the underlying point at issue,
so this spec. is the wrong place to address it.
Ah... so if the issue is how IANA makes registry information
available
Precisely.
then please go to
You have read the spec., and the _only_ concrete thing it tells you
about the registers is the name of an email list. So you have to go
to the email archives and search for . . . what exactly? Different in
the three cases above, and in none of them is it obvious how to know
what counts as
Barry Leiba writes:
You have read the spec., and the _only_ concrete thing it tells you
about the registers is the name of an email list. So you have to go
to the email archives and search for . . . what exactly? Different in
the three cases above, and in none of them is it obvious how to
OK, I now recognise a culture clash as the underlying point at issue,
so this spec. is the wrong place to address it.
Ah... so if the issue is how IANA makes registry information
available, then please go to the happiana mailing list (
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/happiana ) and see if
Barry Leiba writes:
OK, I now recognise a culture clash as the underlying point at issue,
so this spec. is the wrong place to address it.
Ah... so if the issue is how IANA makes registry information
available
Precisely.
then please go to the happiana mailing list (
Henry says...
No, I appreciate that you want to use registered short names in the protocol,
that's just fine. My problem is that you have left users, developers etc.
with
no way to discover what shortnames have been registered short of a non-
trivial and error-prone informal search effort.
