Hi Tim, On 08/22, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: > Hi Warren, all, > > I (co-author) agree that this was an oversight. I have no objections to the > change. > > However.. I haven't checked, but beware that current implementations > might fail to parse the file if a "comment" member is added here, if > they are (overly) strict. I expect that most will simply ignore this > member. Perhaps it's wise that this is verified before finalising the > errata.
The only one I checked was routinator/rpki-rs, which looks like it already does "the right thing": https://github.com/NLnetLabs/rpki-rs/blob/f1274c838eb05a39271db5bbb63cd70d706ec27b/src/slurm.rs#L489 I haven't checked any others, and I agree that it would be helpful if implementors indicate whether this would be a breaking change for them. Cheers, Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
