Re: Use of private OIDs in WG (standard-track) documents

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





> 28 mar 2015 kl. 09:18 skrev Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> 
> Max,
> 
>> On 28/03/15 13:47, Massimiliano Pala wrote:
>> I think that allowing this as a common practice is a bit dangerous.
> 
> What danger do you perceive here? I'm not seeing it. Nor do I see any
> need at all for an "official" IETF-wide position, and in fact, such a
> position is quite likely to be counterproductive IMO.
> 

+1 we have enough work already wo having to invent stuff like this to keep us busy

> And as Phill said, re-numbering, if it breaks code, isn't a good
> plan. Asking if it would break code, etc. on the trans list, is a
> totally reasonable question btw and that discussion is already
> happening there.
> 
> S.
> 
> PS: This isn't about a MIB, but a PKI thing.
> 






[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]