But it does clue one in immediately to the fact that the parameter is
non-standard.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Mark Nottingham
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:11 PM
To: Randy Bush
Cc: Randall Gellens; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-03.txt> (Deprecating Use
of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protocols) to Best Current Practice
On 07/03/2012, at 1:52 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
To me, the target of that language is software that generically
treats protocol elements beginning with "x-" in a fundamentally
different way, without knowledge of its semantics. That is broken,
causes real harm, and I have seen it deployed.
clue bat please? is there any general semantic to X-?
I think one of the main points of the draft is to answer that question
with "no."
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
_______________________________________________
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