Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review

Eliot Lear <> Mon, 01 September 2014 16:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 410B51A03AC for <>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.169
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ppge-TthEw38 for <>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:31:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAB8F1A035E for <>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2979; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1409589089; x=1410798689; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=PWT8Kfj3uhfsOgbWSv80Ob6FWGZOmLfdNoOdFbdwH1w=; b=Q8vCHt2fbb+a6GLNpzfgGSAtmUibnOiskYd7jdHpzq3XqCHUY9MEbJJw rF+82N8CxZiqiFdwz4453oBjeMkQCJQfCXs+UWHiTAcbv8kxr8Jth2rn4 64tp8mdY4ttZ6IiG93vQzeeBQk+xExweTuVlJX9aVqwSz7taR58ayLj2N 4=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 486
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,443,1406592000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="161401461"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP; 01 Sep 2014 16:31:26 +0000
Received: from [] ([]) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s81GVQrY015450; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 16:31:26 GMT
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 18:31:34 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Burger <>, S Moonesamy <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Ptd4XJrH788Q082etsslnedNV9734qOFJ"
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 16:31:32 -0000

Hi Eric & SM,

On 9/1/14, 6:14 PM, Eric Burger wrote:
> I agree with you here: the use of the term IANA protocol parameter
> registry is sloppy. Let’s go with: Many IETF protocols make use of
> commonly defined protocol parameters. Implementers use these
> parameters. Implementers are the IETF's primary users of the IETF
> standards and other documents. A globally available registry contains
> the parameter values and a pointer to documentation of the associated
> semantic intent. This registry, the IETF Protocol Parameters Registry,
> provides this service to ensure consistent interpretation of these
> parameter values by independent implementations. Historically, the
> Internet Assigned Numbers Authority has, under contract, operated the
> IETF Protocol Parameters Registry.

There is a particular facet I think we want to make clear: there may
come a time when we need another distributed registry.  It's not that
hard to imagine.  If so, we will need to look at existing structures,
and assign/delegate accordingly.  Names and unicast IP addresses are
examples of protocol registries that have been assigned to other


>> As a general comment, there is the following under "required proposal elements":  "associated references to source documents of specific policies/practices".  A plausible response would be one which could be substantiated with references.  Otherwise (in my opinion), it will look like the IETF is not comfortable with what it has written.
> On the one hand, we have a lot of references to IETF documents. On the other hand, if a casual reader thinks we do not have enough references, we can have more.

I may have already lost the plot on this one, but as Eric writes, the
document is sprinkled with references, and there is then a specific
question about references.  I could aggregate all the references into
that question, but the reason the references are where they are is so
that people can spot relevance.