Subject: [core] #14: Should there be a "must understand" bit on options?

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:27:42 -0000

#14: Should there be a "must understand" bit on options?
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  hartke@…            |       Owner:            
     Type:  enhancement         |      Status:  new       
 Priority:  major               |   Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  coap                |     Version:  1.0       
 Severity:  Active WG Document  |    Keywords:            
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
 2.1.4 states "Upon reception, unknown options MUST be silently skipped."
 For some of the current options (e.g., the Uri option) this would be
 clearly wrong.
 This is not currently a problem since all CoAP implementations will "know"
 the Uri option.
 But what about future ones?  It will be hard to introduce a "must
 understand" together with an extension that needs it.

 (Note that just cutting off a bit from the option number is probably not
 wise, as there would only be 16 options in each space.)

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/14>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>