>Looking at draft-rosen-geopriv-pidf-interior, it doesn't look to me as
>if it defines how you encode an INT element into a binary CAtype for
>DHCP. Seems like this would be a good thing to have in order to
>maintain parity between the binary and XML forms?
I've been saying all along in order to have this parity work, the new
INT fields will have to be uniquely numbered.
In other words, instead of ONE CAtype=40 for all INT elements (with
additive text identifying the element), you need to have separate
numbers, which for TLVs, translate into separate type values --
otherwise, this doesn't translate into binary at all.
James
>_______________________________________________
>Geopriv mailing list
>Geopriv@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
