Re: I-DAction:draft-ietf-kitten-kerberos-iana-registries-00.txt

"t.p." <[email protected]> writes:

> As for
>
> Transited Encoding Types
> Protocol Version Number
>
> they do not seem worthy of a registry but I am puzzled by the omission
>>From the I-D of
>  Kerberos Message Types
> which looks like an incipient registry to me.

Transited Encoding types should probably have a registry for the sake
of completeness, even though there are unlikely to ever be any more,
and it's best to leave them for standards action.

The protocol version number is effectively never going to change, for
various reasons.

Message types are probably not suitable for registration.  The sort of
change that would result in a new message type number would be a
significant change to the protocol, well beyond what reasonable people
might agree is a new protocol parameter value.

Message types are identical to the ASN.1 application tag numbers of
protocol messages that contain them.  In any given type of protocol
message, the msg-type value will never change.  New message type
numbers will only come into existence with new protocol messages, and
thus be subject to standards action.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg