> On Dec 11, 2020, at 12:33 PM, Iván Arce (Quarkslab) <iarce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hello Russ > > On 12/11/20 1:58 PM, Russ Housley wrote: >>>> 2) The document is really about transient identifiers. It does not only apply to ones that are numeric. >>> >>> That's probably the case. However, the ones we assessed are all numeric identifiers. And those are the ones that we have analyzed in the companion document draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation >>> >>> Just curious: what are the non-numeric transient identifiers you had in mind? >> >> You missed my point. I would not want someone to think that the guidance here in to relevant because the implementation uses a string variable. >> >> Russ > > I've missed it as well. Did you mean that the recommendations apply to > any type of protocol object/field used as a transient identifier ? > or that any transient identifier can be mapped to a number (its just a > bit sequence after all) and therefore the "numeric" term is redundant ? Again, I suggest: s/Transient Numeric Identifiers/Transient Identifiers/ Russ -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
