On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Mark Andrews <marka@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > In message <CAMm+LwiF5=GO_xxdBohh2U85dppu1VffKMrM3zYvH_JmE=-XOg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > , Phillip Hallam-Baker writes: >> So instead of having to fire off three separate applications for the >> Mesh, I would make a request for the codepoint 'MatheMaticalMesh' to >> be reserved to me. That would automatically give me authority to >> define documents specifying the interpretation of: >> >> _mathematicalmesh._wk.example.com SRV ... >> >> http://example.com/.well-known/MatheMaticalMesh/ >> >> urn:mathematicalmesh: > > How does anyone know you need code points in the three spaces? Do > you need a code point in a forth space? I have just asked to register mmm for the SRV space. I will be *REALLY PEEVED* if I get that and then someone else gets mmm for the .well-known. And so would anyone else if that happened to them I expect. Or lets take another example: http://example.com/.well-known/pop3/ Makes no sense, right? Well what if we end up using Web Sockets for everything. Maybe not over http but it could make a lot of sense to do it that way over SSH or some other VPN like protocol. My point there is that once you have an assignment in one space, the others had better be consistent or else we are creating trouble for ourselves. Even if I don't need that code point, nobody else can have it. There are plenty of 15 character alphanumeric strings. Even odder, the process for reserving at IANA doesn't actually match the RFC at all. That isn't bad, in fact one of the things they have done is to remove an issue in the spec that makes no sense, namely having to give a spec for an open protocol but not a proprietary one. >> My problem with IETF isn't that people will say 'this is sh*t' to my >> face. My problem is that when I make a request I can never really know >> if the reason it takes six months or two years to get a response is >> because everyone is really busy or because that is what people are >> saying behind my back. > > I needed 2 code points for EDNS COOKIES. I had both of them within > a days of the initial request. One is permanent (edns option=EDNS > COOKIES) and one is provisional (rcode=BADCOOKIE). Both were sent > to IANA using the general code point assignment request form. Both > are in use in production code which was released weeks after the > requests (BIND 9.10.3). Well that would just fuel people's suspicion that you have to know the right secret handshake to get things done. Or problem is not the same as the one facing the Linux kernel. But that is not the same as not having any problems. I don't see people saying they don't want to be involved in IETF because of people being openly aggressive and rude. I do see people getting turned off because they feel their input isn't considered as worthwhile as those of the inner circle or you have to be in the right club to get things to happen.