Note that the Type column in the registry would start with all 5139 tags defined as Type A.
I am not suggesting two registries. This document would rework the existing CAtypes registry. My proposed change would add one more column to that registry containing "A" or "B".
I am not suggesting any changes to encoding.
Brian
On Mar 9, 2011, at 1:00 AM, Winterbottom, James wrote:
> I think you may be talking past each other a bit here.
>
> I think Brian is saying that the XML and DHCP encodings we have in the document are fine as is, and that his Type-As and Type-Bs are encoded exactly the same way. The only difference is that every implementation SHOULD be expected to understand everything in 5139 + any Type-As that find their way into the new registry.
>
> Is this right Brian?
>
> Cheers
> James
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>> Of Thomson, Martin
>> Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 2011 2:28 PM
>> To: Brian Rosen
>> Cc: geopriv@ietf.org WG
>> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] local-civic registry management policy
>>
>> On 2011-03-09 at 12:42:34, Brian Rosen wrote:
>>> I'm not following the "convert" issue. Who is converting what?
>>
>> You are pulling my leg, right?
>>
>> Conversion between DHCP and XML formats was crucial in reaching the
>> current solution. Without that particular wrinkle, we wouldn't even have
>> this draft.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
