And this is inevitable as you cannot control use of technology by controlling a
registry.
IANA is a consensual illusion. It only has the power to assign names as long as
the community agrees that it performs that role. Patent encumberances must not
be used to deny IANA code points. If that happens the IPR holders will simply
chose their own code points and use them. There is no legal impediment.
This has actually happened in the EUI48 space. Originally a MAC address could
only be assigned for network hardware. So the storage people created their own
registry with an offset which was subsequently grandfathered.
We are not going to break IANA in order in the service of anybodies ideologies.
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org on behalf of Eric Rescorla
Sent: Wed 3/11/2009 10:32 AM
To: Dean Anderson
Cc: ietf-honest(_at_)lists(_dot_)iadl(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: [Ietf-honest] Consensus Call for draft-housley-tls-authz
At Wed, 11 Mar 2009 02:00:31 -0400 (EDT),
Dean Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
Historical Note: They tried the experimental route before. But
Experimental RFC's aren't sufficient for an IANA code point.
Actually, in this case, an Experimental RFC is sufficient to assign
a code point. The requirement is 2434 IETF Consensus.
-Ekr
_______________________________________________
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