Subject: [Ltru] Re: ISO 3166-1 DIS ballot

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 18:54:53 -0700

Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:

> In other words 3066bis draft -01 should work without problems
> at least until date A plus 50 years (2038).  And maybe we can
> improve this situation in draft -02 with a new "canonical" rule
> following 3166-1 as long as possible - until the registry is
> finally forced to take the emergency exit "UN number".

and Randy responded:

> Do you have specific text you'd like to propose?
> Keep in mind that we don't want to make a normative reference
> to work-in-progress.

There's more to it than that.

The draft contains SPECIFIC, EXPLICIT steps for what to do if and when
ISO 3166/MA ever reuses a code element.  This is one of the basic
rationales for the whole LTRU project.

To state that the draft will "work without problems" only until ISO
3166/MA reuses a code element, and that at that point the registry will
be "forced to take an emergency exit," demonstrates complete
misunderstanding of the mechanism described in the draft.

Please read Section 3.3 again, in particular the next-to-last bullet
point (the one with six sub-bullet points):

http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-01.html#ianastability

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/

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