Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] STUN error response registry

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 12:16:36 -0700

On Mar 26, 2007, at 7:44 AM, Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:

> rfc3489bis establishes a registry for attributes and methods but  
> not responses. We've had trouble with resposnes too, so I suggest a  
> registry for them also. Unless someone objects I'll add that to the  
> next revision.

sounds good.

>
> I also suggest that having a working webpage like:
> http://www.employees.org/behave/stun-attributes.html

I would probably rather not do this - I would be very worried about  
creating shadow registries to IANA. Thought we have had examples of  
conflicts in drafts before, it has typically not been a problem in  
most IETF work. Right now there are non IANA defacto web page  
registries for some DNS stuff and that example has convinced me there  
are lots of problems with that path.

_______________________________________________
Behave mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave

---

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 12:16:36 -0700

sounds good.