Re: [Ianaplan] making ARPA explicit (Re: draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call)

[Andrei Robachevsky <[e-mail]>]

Olaf Kolkman wrote on 06/11/14 01:24:
[...]
> CONTEXT:
>    >>> Which IANA service or activity (identified in Section I) is
>    >>> affected.
> 
> 
>    IETF Response: the protocol parameters registries.
> 
> 
> 
> OLD:
>   IETF Response: the protocol parameters registries.
> 
> NEW:
>   IETF Response: the protocol parameters registries including the .ARPA domain.

Yes, .arpa needs to be mentioned. And perhaps it is better to mention it
in the answer to the question "What registries are involved in providing
the service or activity".

I already suggested a more elaborate definition of what protocol
parameter registries entail (see
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg00772.html) and
.ARPA will be there a welcome addition.

Specifically:

"The protocol parameters registries are the product of IETF work. These
also include the top-level registry for the entire IP address space and
some of its sub-registries, AS number space, a number of special use
registries with regard to domain names and the .ARPA domain. For more
detail please refer to the documentation in the "overlaps or
interdependencies" section."

My question here, when we say .ARPA domain, do we mean the whole
sub-tree? Do we need to mention that here explicitly?


My suggestion would be that at the same time we leave the heading the
the main activity as simply "protocol parameters registries", which is
consistent with the high-level division of IANA functions.

Andrei