Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-authz-extns
Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> Fri, 15 June 2007 13:15 UTC
Return-path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HzBdw-0000A6-F0; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:15:12 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HzBdu-0008Cv-8X; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:15:10 -0400
Received: from [202.12.74.196] (helo=jade.coe.psu.ac.th) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HzBds-0000Yn-2r; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:15:09 -0400
Received: from delta.noi.kre.to (delta-194 [172.30.3.194]) by jade.coe.psu.ac.th with ESMTP id l5FDEj24013157; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 20:14:46 +0700 (ICT)
Received: from munnari.OZ.AU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by delta.noi.kre.to (8.12.11/8.11.6) with ESMTP id l5FDEWld018548; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 20:14:35 +0700 (ICT)
From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <200706150008.l5F08EXt014583@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
References: <200706150008.l5F08EXt014583@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <tslveduxfp2.fsf@mit.edu> <B356D8F434D20B40A8CEDAEC305A1F24043F6B4D@esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com> <466E959D.80601@cisco.com> <466EA98D.9010401@dcrocker.net> <D2C66431AE5E7F688AB7DA5C@[192.168.0.3]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 20:14:32 +0700
Message-ID: <20009.1181913272@munnari.OZ.AU>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, mark.brown@redphonesecurity.com, ietf@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net
Subject: Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-authz-extns
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:08:13 -0700 From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: <200706150008.l5F08EXt014583@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> | (Now would be an excellent time to | consider updates/clarifications to the above text.) Aside from the minor problem that the paragraph you quoted is way more wordy and chatty than is really needed, it gets the "should be" procedure all wrong. The IANA is the Internet Assigned Numbers AUTHORITY and should be treated that way - allowing assignment requirements in specs to be ignored in cases where they're obviously wrong is fine. But is the IANA which (who) should make the decision, not the IESG. By all means, require the IANA to notify the IESG (or IETF) in advance, and allow time for objections to an assignment (or for general input to the IANA which may influence either the yes/no decision, or in some cases the actual value assigned). But the decision belongs to IANA, not the IESG (just as the final decision whether to publish a RFC rests with the RFC editor, and not the IESG). There's a tendency, especially in procedures authored by IESG (or ex-IESG) members for everything to be made the responsibility of the IESG. That's the wrong approach in most cases. Under the same section heading you have now (5.3....) the text I would include would be something like... Not withstanding any requirement in any document published before or after this specification, the IANA has the power to allocate a code point in any IANA maintained registry whenever it appears to the IANA that doing so is in the best interests of the Internet community. Before the IANA makes a registry entry in accordance with this procedure it shall advise the IESG (or the IETF as a whole) of the request for registration, and wait a period of not less than 21 days to receive comments and advice from the Internet community before proceeding with the registration. That's all that's needed (the "21 days" is just an arbitrary number, seems long enough without being too long, but use whatever you prefer). kre _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- RE: IANA registration constraints Bob Braden
- Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-auth… Sam Hartman
- RE: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Eliot Lear
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Dave Crocker
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Tony Finch
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Dave Crocker
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… John C Klensin
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Brian E Carpenter
- IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withdrawi… Dave Crocker
- IANA considerations and IETF Consensus Paul Hoffman
- Re: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… John C Klensin
- Re: IANA registration constraints Dave Crocker
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… John C Klensin
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Thomas Narten
- Type I vs. Type II errors Dave Crocker
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Sam Hartman
- Re: IANA considerations and IETF Consensus Paul Hoffman
- RE: IANA registration constraints Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Russ Housley
- Re: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Pasi.Eronen
- RE: IANA registration constraints Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: IANA considerations and IETF Consensus Jari Arkko
- Re: IANA registration constraints Jari Arkko
- RE: IANA registration constraints Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: IANA registration constraints Ralph Droms
- RE: IANA registration constraints Paul Hoffman
- Re: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Paul Hoffman
- RE: IANA registration constraints Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… John C Klensin
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: IANA registration constraints Brian E Carpenter
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Paul Hoffman
- RE: IANA registration constraints Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… michael.dillon
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Thomas Narten
- Re: Type I vs. Type II errors Stephane Bortzmeyer
- RE: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Pasi.Eronen
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Robert Elz
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Thomas Narten
- Role of IANA in approving assignments Thomas Narten
- Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments Robert Elz
- RE: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
- Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments Sam Hartman
- RE: IANA registration constraints (was: Re: Withd… Paul Hoffman
- Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments Paul Hoffman
- Re: Type I vs. Type II errors Keith Moore
- Re: Type I vs. Type II errors Keith Moore
- Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments Harald Alvestrand
- IANA considerations concerns -- specific cases? Jari Arkko
- Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-… John C Klensin