Cullen Jennings <fluffy@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 4/10/06 6:34 PM, "John C Klensin" <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> --On Tuesday, 11 April, 2006 11:26 +1000 Mark Andrews >> <Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> On 4/10/06 4:31 PM, "Mark Andrews" <Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Did the base32 extended hex version get used in the SASL >>>>>> work? Can we upda >>>> te >>>>>> the reference or if it is not needed not just remove it. >>>>> >>>>> base32 extended hex is being / will be used for NSEC3 as it >>>>> preserves the sort order. >>>> >>>> Great - perhaps we could add a reference to that. >>> >>> Work in progress. draft-ietf-dnsext-nsec3-04.txt needs to >>> be update to say base32 extended hex and reference this >>> draft. >> >> But such a reference from the Base16, Base32,... draft is not >> normative. To simply give (clearly non-normative) examples, >> with each encoding, of where it is used or expected to be used >> seems to me to helpful to the reader and to cost almost nothing. >> >> john >> > > I was concerned that we might be defining an option that no one needed and > that would just encourage more variations where they were not needed. The > fact that nsec3 has chosen to use this particular form is good enough proof > for me that there is a need for the base32 extended hex form. I agree a > informative ref to the work in progress will help people fine examples of > where it was used and perhaps have a better understanding of where and why > they might pick a particular form. All sounds good. I agree with this discussion, and have added an informational reference to the NSEC3 document in the base32hex section. The updated version can be found at: http://josefsson.org/base-encoding/draft-josefsson-rfc3548bis.txt with rfcdiff's to the -02 version in last call at: http://josefsson.org/base-encoding/draft-josefsson-rfc3548bis-from--02.diff.html Thanks. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf