3 ms·

To be more specific, RFC 1065 states its use of the subtree that was initially held by the U.S. National Bureau of Standards. The NBS transferred the subtree to

To be more specific, RFC 1065 states its use of the subtree that was initially held by the U.S. National Bureau of Standards. The NBS transferred the subtree to DoD, which had not stated how it intended to manage it. Thus, the DoD might have chosen a different value for the last digit of the internet subtree, but that's all. This isn't really hijacking, although it does seem a bit haphazard. Considering the "official" handling of the subtree transfer, I suspect that the DoD did accept the decision after the RFC was submitted as a draft, with the RFC just not updated to reflect this. 30 years later, I don't think anyone cares about OIDs.

tialaramex 9y ago
"I suspect that the DoD did accept the decision after the RFC was submitted" You suspect that an enormous Federal bureaucracy "accepted" something but it isn't written down anywhere? Does that sound right to you? If you mean "accept" in the tacit sense that they can't do anything about it now, well, of course, that's why I called it "hijacking". I can't do anything about the fact I'll be home late when my bus is hijacked, but let's not pretend I've "accepted" the new destination and somehow now the nutjob with a gun has my permission to take it there. Funny thing about OIDs, everything that needs to enumerate things and touches any of the ISO/ITU X series standards uses OIDs, yes, still in 2018 and presumably forever. For example you might have noticed that TLS 1.3 is now (probably) finished. Grep through that and you'll find it mentions all the OIDs you need to use to make it work, and introduces OID filters so that you can write key-value matches for client certificates like "I only want client certs which have the following policy OID". OIDs are fine, there is no reason to create a new parallel system that would work the same way and presumably either duplicate the OID hierarchy or try to displace it.

tialaramex 9y ago

"I suspect that the DoD did accept the decision after the RFC was submitted" You suspect that an enormous Federal bureaucracy "accepted" something but it isn't written down anywhere? Does that sound right to you? If you mean "accept" in the tacit sense that they can't do anything about it now, well, of course, that's why I called it "hijacking". I can't do anything about the fact I'll be home late when my bus is hijacked, but let's not pretend I've "accepted" the new destination and somehow now the nutjob with a gun has my permission to take it there. Funny thing about OIDs, everything that needs to enumerate things and touches any of the ISO/ITU X series standards uses OIDs, yes, still in 2018 and presumably forever. For example you might have noticed that TLS 1.3 is now (probably) finished. Grep through that and you'll find it mentions all the OIDs you need to use to make it work, and introduces OID filters so that you can write key-value matches for client certificates like "I only want client certs which have the following policy OID". OIDs are fine, there is no reason to create a new parallel system that would work the same way and presumably either duplicate the OID hierarchy or try to displace it.