- From: Graham Klyne <GK@dial.pipex.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 21:53:12 +0000
- To: Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
- Cc: IETF Applications Area Discussion List <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
At 21:35 22/03/99 +0100, Jacob Palme wrote: >At 22.55 +0100 99-03-17, Graham Klyne wrote: >> At 13:17 17/03/99 +0100, Jacob Palme wrote: >> >At the APPCORE meeting in Minneapolis, it was said that APPCORE should >> >not contain any building block which is not used in two existing >> >IETF standard. >> >> I don't think extensibility is excluded by this rule -- both HTTP and SMTP >> have extension mechanisms defined. > >Yes, but none of them has a facility for marking extensions >as critical or non-critical, and this is something I would >very much like to have in APPLCORE. Well, yes, but... In the case of HTTP I believe that there does exist such a mechanism (but I could be wrong there). In the case of SMTP, because the necessary information is declared up front (by EHLO response) before a transaction is initiated, the client can base a request upon this information so I don't see a critical/nom-critical designation is needed. The fact that it is not needed in all cases suggests to me that critical/non-critical marking should not be part of a *core* protocol. #g ------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Monday, 22 March 1999 16:52:38 UTC