Subject: Re: [core] Range issue in core-parameters registry

From: Klaus Hartke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 18:17:01 +0200

Carsten Bormann wrote:
> Zach Shelby wrote:
>> Maybe time to give up on the great unification experiment?
>> We need to do it very soon, or end up with a bunch of duplicates.
>
> To me it seems we should accelerate the unification.
> The most expedient approach would be to simply assign the values from
>
>         https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/core/mediatypes.txt
>
> for each combination of an existing media type and the identity content
> coding that is being requested.

The problem with assigning the number in bulk is that many media types
define required and/or optional parameters (see
<http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/core/mediatypeparams.txt> for a
quick overview). Parameter values are often open-ended. So it's not
possible to simply assign one number for each media type or for each
media type/parameter value combination.

The intention for the 256-9999 range was that they're used for media
types registered in the IANA Media Type registry. So my proposal would
be: if someone needs a content format number allocated for a
registered media type, they should be able to get that done easily
without having to publish an RFC first. Media types with a closed set
of parameter values would get allocated one number per parameter
value. Media types with an open-ended set of parameter values would
not be supported.

Thoughts?

Klaus