[rfc-i] On backwards compatibility for v2

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Mon Feb 10 12:48:38 PST 2014


On Feb 10, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 2/10/2014 10:29 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> 
>> I still believe that we can get to a reasonable v3 without having to
>> break existing (valid) documents.
> 
> 
> It is very easy to neglect installed base.  (Take a look at IPv6 as a particularly unfortunate example; it could have been done as a largely-compatible upgrade to v4, rather than forcing an independent stack.)
> 
> So I suggest declaring backward compatibility an explcit requirement, just so no one else gets confused.

If there is a converter from v2 to v3, and the v2 formatter continues to work, of what possible value is such a requirement?

> Might even want to say that the conversion tool is for those who happen to want to upgrade, but that it isn't required.

That's a much more reasonable statement, one that allows us to meet the more important goal of v3, namely easier to use for writers.

--Paul Hoffman


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list