I suppose one could argue that X- should never be on the Public Internet,
anyway. But they are. If we remove X-, then what will happen is developers
will use names that don't have X-. Will that make things better? No. I'd
argue it will make it worse.
Non-standard extensions do present issues, that's no in question. However,
killing X- will only mean other values will be used. At least X- can be
ignored.
I'm not going to throw up a roadblock to the draft. Call for the end of X-
if you want, but I know it will not stop introduction of non-standard values
in protocols, so a problem will remain.
One way to help this is to get standards through the IETF faster. Some take
forever.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot(_at_)mnot(_dot_)net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 12:57 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: 'Randy Bush'; '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
Yes, but (as the draft tries to explain) putting this kind of metadata in
a name is prone to issues, because it can change -- i.e., when a header
(or other protocol element) becomes standard.
On 07/03/2012, at 4:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:
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
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf