[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IPSEC SMIB




James P. Hughes says:
> I agree that experimental stuff could use this, but proprietary
> algorithms that either do not want to be interoperable or are forced
> (for various reasons which I will not go into) to remain
> proprietary, may continue to use the experimental label. This would
> be a problem.

As has been noted repeatedly, IANA registration is not onerous and is
easily accomplished for proprietary protocols. Very large numbers of
completely unofficial and proprietary protocols have been IANA
registered. IANA registration implies nothing about IETF
standardization, openness, or anything else. It simply implies that
you've asked IANA for a number.

> > In any case, until the IANA gives us cause to doubt its efficacy, this
> > is a red herring.
> 
> Maybe I am wrong.
> 
> I need 2 mapping right now for proprietary algorithms. I can disclose the
> mappings but can not disclose the algorithms being used.
> 
> Will I have a problem getting these mappings?

None in all likelyhood. The only way that would happen would be if the
registration space was small -- but it is in fact likely to be vast,
and the probability of being denied an assigned number is close to
zero.

Perry


References: