In <200202051500(_dot_)g15F0F915415(_at_)astro(_dot_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith
Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
But I can't help but wonder if there aren't other, more
controversial proposals that people want to deploy without
community review, and that's why they're trying to get IETF
to say that we don't need review of mail protocol extensions
before deploying them.
To some extent yes. I would like to register speech act
terminology like "Speech act" with values like "promise",
"request", "offer", "delivery", etc. and pro-contra-
analysis headers like "Pros", "Cons", "Cause-of",
"Effect-of", "Cost-of", "Risk-with", etc.
The risk with a completely open registry is that any
fool might want to register headers related to his
favourite religious fanatism, or spammers might want
to register headers favoring their web sites.
Say that someone wanted to register "Best-Porn-Website"
or "Days-Before-Judgement-Day" as e-mail headers in
a completely open registry!
So I do agree that some kind of control of what we
allow is needed. In general, I have a feeling that
the discussion is nearing consensus.
--
Jacob Palme <jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/jpalme/