Re: Last Call on draft-ietf-pim-registry-03.txt

[Mykyta Yevstifeyev <[e-mail]>]

13.01.2011 13:31, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 13.01.2011 10:21, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Let me cite RFC 5226, that says:
>>
>> <...>
>> Documents that create a new namespace (or modify the definition of an
>> existing space) and that expect IANA to play a role in maintaining
>> that space (e.g., serving as a repository for registered values) MUST
>> provide clear instructions on details of the namespace.  In
>> particular, instructions *MUST* include:
>> <...>
>> 5) Initial assignments and reservations.  Clear instructions should be
>> provided to identify any initial assignments or registrations.  In
>> addition, any ranges that are to be reserved  for "Private Use",
>> "Reserved", *"Unassigned"*, etc. should be *clearly indicated*.
>> <...>
>> ...
>
> That sounds like an editorial error to me.
>
> "any ranges to be *reserved* for .... "Unassigned"..."
>
> doesn't make any sense at all. They are not reserved.
Yes, that is a type of error, but the meaning is that unassigned and 
reserved values MUST (yes, must, that is in RFC 5226; see citation 
below) be mentioned.
>
> This should probably be raised as erratum.
>
>> So the document specifying the regsitry MUST mention what are
>> Unassigned.  Moreover, IMO, it would be useful to assign one value for
>> Experimentation.
>
> No. should != must.
See below.
>
> There are tons of registries where this is not the case; namely all or 
> most of those where the values are strings, not numbers.
The strings registries are rather exceptions from the rule I cited above.

Mykyta
>
>
> Best regards, Julian
>