Re: INFO Framework: IANA Registry

Eric Burger wrote:

> We can also have two trees, one Specification Required and one Private. 
> This has been proven to be an interoperability and marketing nightmare, 
> but I will put it out there for completeness.

Can you say more? Why would it be more of a nightmare than FCFS?

> I would offer we go with First Come First Served.  We can have a field 
> for a reference, giving us the best of the specification required (you 
> can look up what a published specification is) and Private (if you are 
> creating a private Info Package, you do not have to specify anything 
> other than the package name).
> 
> Please Vote:
> [ ] First Come First Served with pointer to optional specification
> [ ] First Come First Served
> [ ] Specification Required
> [ ] Expert Review
> [X] Two trees: Specification Required and Private

IMO this is better than FCFS with pointer because it gives a higher 
degree of legitimacy to those with specifications, which provides an 
incentive to get that.

But I will make FCFS w/opt spec my 2nd choice.

	Thanks,
	Paul
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip