Re: [apps-discuss] URI registry

Tony Hansen <tony@att.com> Thu, 10 February 2011 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 451663A6A39 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:17:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -107.09
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.909, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, J_CHICKENPOX_48=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F1FPLa-buo5t for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:17:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail121.messagelabs.com (mail121.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF8EB3A6A43 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:17:04 -0800 (PST)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-121.messagelabs.com!1297354636!43152991!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.145]
Received: (qmail 5479 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2011 16:17:16 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp6.sbc.com (HELO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.145) by server-5.tower-121.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 10 Feb 2011 16:17:16 -0000
Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1AGHcgI019039 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 11:17:39 -0500
Received: from alpd052.aldc.att.com (alpd052.aldc.att.com [130.8.42.31]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1AGHZP6018902 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 11:17:35 -0500
Received: from aldc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1AGHBcO016775 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 11:17:12 -0500
Received: from mailgw1.maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1AGH90M016704 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 11:17:09 -0500
Received: from [135.91.110.95] (dn135-91-110-95.dhcpn.ugn.att.com[135.91.110.95]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20110210161708gw100e4loue> (Authid: tony); Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:17:09 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.91.110.95]
Message-ID: <4D540F83.5070409@att.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 11:17:07 -0500
From: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>
References: %3C4D26B005.2060909@gmail.com%3E <4D2C7755.5080908@gmail.com> <81F42F63D5BB344ABF294F8E80990C7902782BBA@MTV-EXCHANGE.microfocus.com> <4D455380.6040103@gmail.com> <3792F8F3-D01B-4B05-9E73-59228F09FE5C@gbiv.com> <4D464EA4.7090303@gmail.com> <7ED44745-7DBA-4372-BE39-22061DC26DF2@gbiv.com> <4D46CE52.6030503@vpnc.org> <4D47DD4A.7040503@gmail.com> <06BA884E-D1C7-4783-BBE6-A6B21DE013B7@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4D482071.8050202@gmail.com> <CDAB7832-EBF9-4ECE-B8D1-09BA39BDF4B8@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4D48267A.1030800@gmail.com> <96CC61EE-81BD-43CB-A83F-78E67B2DA7A5@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D058EEE61B9@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <026901cbc781$a2724ee0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4D520AE6.8070502@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <000901cbc867$7a9d31a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4D537E48.9030403@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4D53BF48.1010804@ninebynine.org>
In-Reply-To: <4D53BF48.1010804@ninebynine.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: public-iri@w3.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] URI registry
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:17:06 -0000

On 2/10/2011 5:34 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> As a reviewer, I sometimes make a recommendation that is in the spirit 
> of the proposal even if not explicitly covered by the letter, but also 
> alerting the relevant IESG director if I do so.  I think this is very 
> much in the IETF spirit of "do the right thing".
>
> For the message header registry, there some "weasel words" to allow 
> some flexibility in section 4.4 that were intended to help circumvent 
> unnecessary process-wrangling, ending with "The IESG is the final 
> arbiter of any objection."
>
> It seems to me that if the IANA+reviewer make a visible disposition 
> that nobody objects to, the easiest thing is to just do it.
>
> I'm not sure if it's necessary, but one might consider a minor update 
> up the registration RFC(s) to provide this lattitude more explicitly, 
> with further effort to be expended only in the event of an objection.  
> At some point, we need to trust the process participants (reserving 
> the option to verify), or we get nowhere.

+1