Subject: [Mip4] [issue43] Experimental (sub) option type for existing options?

From: Alpesh <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:28:55 +0000

This has been entered in the issue tracker as issue 43.

owner: Alpesh <[email-masked]>:

category: Technical
draft: draft-ietf-mip4-experimental-messages
priority: Should fix
status: No discussion
title: Experimental (sub) option type for existing options?

Hi -

We have one open issue for this draft - 

Description: Should we define an experimental sub-type for existing options?

One school of thought is that this is not needed as the experiemental extension
types permits us to achieve this. By using the experimental extension type, one
can use all the sub-types in that type for experimentation. 

Other school of thought is that for existing options, if any experimentation is
needed we can use an experimental sub-type from that type. Once ready for
standardization almost no code change is required to change that experimental
sub-type to use a standard sub-type.

We need the WG comments to resolve this issue and move on to the next level.
Your prompt attention in this regards is highly appreciated. Please let me know
if you need further clarification.

Thanks
Alpesh
_________________________________________________
Mip4 issue tracker <[email-masked]>
<http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/mip4/issue43>
_________________________________________________

-- 
Mip4 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 22:49:32 +0100

We would like to move forward with draft-ietf-mip4-experimental-messages.

There is currently one open issue, reflected here:

The possible positions seems to be either of:
  * "Yes, add experimental sub-type number"
  * "No, do not add experimental sub-type number"

I'd like to get a little bit more feedback from the list on this issue,
please comment on this, indicating your preference.

	Henrik