[AFS3-std] RxOSD claim on 2 structure members

[Russ Allbery]

Simon Wilkinson <simon@sxw.org.uk> writes:
> On 8 Jun 2009, at 03:05, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> The problem is that, because these fields are not and were not
>> standardized at all and existing software would ignore them, people
>> may have used them.

> The interesting thing here is that this approach pretty much makes all
> of the unused or spare protocol fields unusable. I can completely see
> the justification for it, but it does significantly reduce our
> flexibility, both now and in the future.

Yeah, I was thinking of that, and that may be too strong.  We may want
to apply the strong version only with protocol fields that we know
people have been using.

It occurs to me that if we know of unused and spare fields that we're
pretty sure no one is using, we should try to make a really loud noise
about how we're reserving them for *only* protocol changes that come out
of this working group so that we can hang on to them.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>