Almost all registries I'm familiar with explicitly list unassigned
ranges. In some cases, different unassigned subranges have different
allocation policies. For example, there may be a small unassigned
range of lower values requiring Standards Action with the bulk of the
unassigned values allocatable on a less stringent basis.
Thanks,
Donald
=============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
155 Beaver Street
Milford, MA 01757 USA
d3e3e3(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Julian Reschke
<julian(_dot_)reschke(_at_)gmx(_dot_)de> wrote:
On 12.01.2011 15:22, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Entirely at random I clicked on:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/aaa-parameters/aaa-parameters.xhtml
http://www.iana.org/assignments/calipso/calipso.xhtml
http://www.iana.org/assignments/lmp-parameters
Looks like IANA tries to fill up all the blanks with markers of
"unassigned".
Is that harmful?
Minimally, it's redundant. Also, it only makes sense on certain types of
registries.
I just checked the XML version of the first registry, and, indeed, it
contains entries for unassigned values. /me shakes head in disbelief.
What *should* be done is computing the unassigned ranges for *presentation*;
that is, they should not be part of the actual registry. The way it's done
currently defeats one of the reasons of having a machine-readable registry
(consumers will have to hard-wire knowledge of the specific "unassigned"
entry to make sense of the registry).
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf