Re: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing (take 2)

I've read into RFC8126 a little more and I don't think there needs to be
anything more specific said for expert guidance. I'm fine with adding a
paragraph to that effect as well. I think with the spec required, it's
going to be fairly obvious what the use case is, and furthermore the expert
shouldn't be needlessly restricted as they are indeed an expert. I don't
think we need to make the barrier any higher for registration, and I don't
think additions to the registry will be common. I'll note that in the
paragraph as well. Thoughts?

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 12:44 PM Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org> wrote:

> I have updated with your comment.
>
> Not sure what kind of additional guidance you are looking for. I'm open to
> the idea, but I'd need some example text to consider. Is there a document
> that you feel has done a particularly good job that I could reference?
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 11:28 AM Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>>   For the IANA registry, I think you want to pattern it more like section
>> 6.4, since this is creating a new subregistry, e.g.:
>>
>>     The IANA is requested to create a new "CDNI URI Signing Verification
>> Code" subregistry, in the "Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (CDNI)
>> Parameters" registry.  The "CDNI URI Signing Verification Code" namespace
>> defines the valid values associated with the s-uri-signing CDNI Logging
>> Field.  The CDNI URI Signing Verification Code is a 3DIGIT value as defined
>> in <ref>section 4.5</ref>.  Additions to the CDNI URI Signing Verification
>> Code namespace will conform to the "Specification Required" policy as
>> defined in [RFC8126].
>>
>>     The following table defines the initial Verification Codes:
>>
>>   Also, for the new registries, do we want to give any additional
>> guidance to the expert reviewer as to what would make for a reasonable or
>> unreasonable addition to each registry?
>>
>> thanx.
>>
>> --  Kevin J. Ma
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 3:28 PM Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> https://github.com/PSUdaemon/URISigningSpec/pull/63
>>>
>>> Please confirm this was the intent of the comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 6:41 PM Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>>   The WGLC has now closed.  There were no major objections.  We will
>>>> address Chris's comments and move forward with submitting the draft.
>>>>
>>>> thanx!
>>>>
>>>> --  Kevin, Phil, and Francois
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 1:46 AM Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>>   Today will begin the two-week WGLC on:
>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing-18
>>>>>
>>>>>   Please send any comments, questions, or concerns to the CDNI
>>>>> mailing list: cdni@ietf.org
>>>>>
>>>>>  The WGLC will end on Wednesday August 7, 2019, at which time, assuming there are no objections, we will submit the draft to the IESG
>>>>>
>>>>> thanx!
>>>>>
>>>>> --  Kevin, Phil, and Francois
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CDNi mailing list
>>>> CDNi@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni
>>>>
>>>