[apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IESG processing of MIME type registrations from other SDOs
Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Thu, 03 March 2011 16:13 UTC
Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.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 BC5BE3A6A06 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:13:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 DMab-KFB-Fvk for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D5C3A69ED for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.124] ((unknown) [62.3.217.253]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <TW--hwADL1lr@rufus.isode.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2011 16:15:03 +0000
X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: NORDNS
Message-ID: <4D6FBE4D.10602@isode.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 16:14:05 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IESG processing of MIME type registrations from other SDOs
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, 03 Mar 2011 16:13:57 -0000
I am working with the rest of IESG on issuing the following IESG statement: ------------------------ BCP 13 (currently RFC 4288) specifies that Media Type registrations from other Standards Organizations (SDOs) can be submitted directly to IESG for approval, without a need to submit an Internet Draft and to ask an Area Director to shepherd its publication. While this IESG statement doesn't change that, IESG would like to encourage other SDOs to submit their registriation as Internet Drafts, as this tends to improve quality of final registrations, and sometimes even improves quality of the underlying format itself. IESG would also like to remind that as per BCP 13, other SDOs are not excluded from the requirement to post their Media Type registrations for 2 weeks review on the ietf-types@iana.org mailing list. When reviewing Media Type registrations IESG checks that the Media Type registration template is correct and reasonably complete. When reviewing Media Type registrations (including those from other SDOs) IESG also checks that references to documents describing details of the Media Type format are stable, i.e. - a) the references are reasonably long lived and - b1) the document pointed to by the reference is either immutable (i.e. if an updated document is approved for publication by the SDO, then it will be posted at a different URI) or can only change in insignificant ways (e.g. to correct typos, clarify text without changing the media type format, etc.) - b2) the media type format contains some internal fields for versioning that can be used to distingiush 2 incompatible versions of the Media Type format - b3) there is some guaranty that future revisions of the format are going to be backward compatible Note that the choices b1, b2 and b3 are not mutually exclusive. If the Media Type format specification has licensing restrictions, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) must be granted express permission to make archival copies of the Media Type format specification, and to redistribute such a copy in the event that the link to the format specification becomes inoperative and it is determined that it will not be repaired. ------------------------ Please let me know if you have any corrections or major objections to this before March 17th. Thanks, Alexey
- [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IESG pr… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… SM
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Ted Hardie
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Larry Masinter
- Re: [apps-discuss] Possible IESG statement on IES… Alexey Melnikov