Re: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry

"Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB)" <> Sun, 06 November 2016 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2C0A1298AF for <>; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 05:51:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BpN7s7weCjQO for <>; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 05:51:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54D361298AB for <>; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 05:51:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown []) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id C1F09D9A0E7CE; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 13:51:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( []) by (GMO-o) with ESMTP id uA6Dpak8003498 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 6 Nov 2016 13:51:37 GMT
Received: from ( []) by (GMO) with ESMTP id uA6DpZ9O005655 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sun, 6 Nov 2016 14:51:36 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 14:51:35 +0100
From: "Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB)" <>
To: Brian Rosen <>
Thread-Topic: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 13:51:34 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADFA84BCFR712WXCHMBA11z_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2016 13:51:43 -0000

So your first action to the request should be to review the request against the criteria in the RFC and respond to the requester with your analysis, not the WG.

I would note that CT1 meets in a weeks time, so this gets urgent if you want them to consider your expert reviewer postion.


From: Brian Rosen []
Sent: 04 November 2016 15:32
To: Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB)
Cc: Az Mankin;
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry

I think the criteria is fine.

If they had proposed a service in the way we envisioned services, say “Swift Water Rescue”, it would be a no-brainer.

In this case they want to create an escape hatch, country specific, with no registry.  This is not what we anticipated.  That means that the review will be difficult.

An expert reviewer is needed.  Alison asked, and I accepted.  I am the expert reviewer.

I will follow the normal process, which includes consulting with others, in this case, the entire WG, and responding back through the usual channels.

It may be that as a result of this request we generate a document that updates 7163.  We’ll see.

But right now, I think we have a workable process that comports with established IETF procedures.


On Nov 4, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB) <<>> wrote:

I would add further that the process is for the Expert Reviewer to send any questions or concerns back to IANA and thence to the original requester, not make a post on the list asking if anyone is aware of the issue.

I would stress that any response in this case would need to be based on 3GPP CT1 discussion of the response to the IANA registration requestion, and possibly amendment of the IANA registration section of the referenced specification.


From: Ecrit [] On Behalf Of Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB)
Sent: 04 November 2016 14:55
To: Az Mankin
Cc:<>; Brian Rosen
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry

The process is that the WG should have (long ago) appointed an expert or experts for the registry, and that information should be given to IANA.

IANA would then send the review request to the appropriate expert and the review would have taken place without necessarily any direct involvement of the WG, based on the criteria specified in the RFC 7163.

Instead this appears to be automatically turning into “Working Group Review” for which there is no such case, rather than “Expert Review”.


From: Az Mankin []
Sent: 04 November 2016 13:50
To: Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB)
Cc: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat;<>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry

Hi, Keith,
When the RFC was reviewed by the IESG, the Expert Review policy was set to "ECRIT WG or their successor or the IESG if there is no successor."  I asked for this to be on the list (but noting that it has a two week deadline) because of this, and I'm not sure what the concern is.

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Drage, Keith (Nokia - GB) <<>> wrote:
This suggestion to discuss on the list before anyone had even looked at it suggests that the WG has totally failed in setting the review criteria for IANA registration to Expert Review. It should be the awkward ones where the reviewer might come to the list, not all of them.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ecrit [<>] On Behalf Of Brian Rosen
Sent: 03 November 2016 21:15
To: Paul Kyzivat
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] DUE 11/17 - Volunteer for Expert Review: IANA 'sos' Sub-Services registry

I intend to.  ISTM this violates the spirit of urn:service:sos

I don't recall being in or seeing a discussion on this.

Is anyone on the list familiar with this work?

> On Nov 3, 2016, at 5:09 PM, Paul Kyzivat <<>> wrote:
> On 11/3/16 4:56 PM, Brian Rosen wrote:
>> I'll do it
> I think it would be good to have this discussed on the list. (Wasn't
> there already some discussion, somewhere?)
>       Thanks,
>       Paul
>> Brian
>>> On Nov 3, 2016, at 3:59 PM, Az Mankin <<>
>>> <<>>> wrote:
>>> ECRIT Working Group,
>>> We need a volunteer for the following IANA Expert Review request
>>> that Amanda Baber of IANA just sent to Roger and me.  It needs to be
>>> written and sent to the mailing list, per the IESG's appointment of
>>> the WG as the Expert Reviewer
>>> (
>>> Amanda's message is under the line. Who'd like to step up for this?
>>> Thanks!  from your Chairs
>>> ----------------
>>> The IANA Services Operator has received a request for registration
>>> in the 'sos' Sub-Services registry in the Service URN Labels group.
>>> This request comes from Frederic Firmin of ETSI.
>>> According to RFC 7163, registration in 'sos' Sub-Services requires
>>> expert review as designated by the ECRIT working group or its
>>> successor (or, in their absence, the IESG). Can you send this
>>> request for review?
>>> The IESG has asked that expert reviews be completed within two
>>> weeks, if possible.
>>> See below.
>>> thanks,
>>> Amanda Baber
>>> Lead IANA Services Specialist
>>> PTI
>>> ===
>>> Contact Name:
>>> Frederic Firmin
>>> Contact Email:
>>><> <<>>
>>> Type of Assignment:
>>> sub-service URN
>>> Registry:
>>> Service URN Labels registry with the "sos" URN Service Labels subregistry.
>>> Description:
>>> This sub-service type is used before an appropriate sub-service type
>>> is registered with IANA for a specific emergency service. This
>>> sub-service type is not used where an appropriate sub-service type
>>> has been registered with IANA for the specific emergency service.
>>> The next level of sub-services indicates the country where the
>>> specific emergency service is used. Subtypes below this are defined
>>> by national regulation of that country and are not registered with IANA.
>>> Additional Info:
>>> The following service URN is proposed to be registered:
>>> reference: 24.229 12.14.0 available at
>>> <
>>> p>
>>> (cf subclause 7.11.1)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ecrit mailing list
>>><> <<>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ecrit mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list

Ecrit mailing list<>

Ecrit mailing list<>