Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis

Barry Leiba <> Tue, 24 May 2016 12:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3BA412D6D8; Tue, 24 May 2016 05:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.401
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.198, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z-bSDl9s40rR; Tue, 24 May 2016 05:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7B5512D6C0; Tue, 24 May 2016 05:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id x189so14199180ywe.3; Tue, 24 May 2016 05:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ddUNbcAiei65Rp6MmZQAd58Uzs2gX0ZWc+eR3Tzh0Xw=; b=vREiK+4h2dACezBTE/K48l+zjnJIOSCGDciRn77xcOfLPjJGRouQN5d9TM5WoCKAED XgslP4K/gC9wmuV0kFdnNgQgAwvatJcrxWPqWsxnlsL7HwdFavXQF0QyvskKRfqUCCJO 9Fo0kb06WM5A+EU6y4/EWrnv7zr8F8EBiHMOceQJQOnIj2C+AVlZO3dBlOKh/5dFe/RD iBr3VVI/loVJAqdHzg96x3T0lXdutcAwX6jlZ7YhCdGUvtUziSfwQ+krz+3bEuyvfdJe pDzvEX2RxvPwSUGNQdueLvyry08hnsSxcZXBFoU1M6hHHMyon6+mNHV1jhiPJa+Ghjk2 Qwzg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ddUNbcAiei65Rp6MmZQAd58Uzs2gX0ZWc+eR3Tzh0Xw=; b=TOfaiq0ktHOG1uI07nL9k2BQj3I2pGsp/cREt7GYrr+294eF/IsJQW8lkBEfa6pjcP ntCN5503wiJJZAQ0lQLXtpMWrzBLWKQBpzQJq6Kj1tC1d1sKMARfTHMcNeYn/wpp5HS3 TeJxtA1Pnf7cTju5BWKc607RoLGoKIpRYlg87M5+RMh9rFAUQAbd+N1ziN19/ci09rJL wL722YehZ1Je0E9KGQy6xqyJS4AFckssKZMCcj9BFayuy51Sa4ULpRe25M5O6Ns05i7E DjrwKilheAp8Gq59j6wFgkaOHM5CzZPx1a1biuOA1nUxN3Vygu04JLTDSc6g1gn04JDF V8Pg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJDYv1AP2HiBD75UBKIB43A31XROv2tEPIh2qtBCvLP7hHpg+pMtxI9vYrjEKVD75pDuun3v3Ql0518Ow==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id u137mr2274535ywe.257.1464094116060; Tue, 24 May 2016 05:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Tue, 24 May 2016 05:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <007601d1b58b$79f3afb0$6ddb0f10$>
References: <007601d1b58b$79f3afb0$6ddb0f10$>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:48:35 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: d_7FzJr0BQNe4JXGrpPVkN-DEg8
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis
From: Barry Leiba <>
To: Roni Even <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Cc: General Area Review Team <>, "" <>, IETF discussion list <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 12:48:38 -0000

Hi, Roni, and thanks for the review.

> I am wondering about the lack of normative language for example in section
> 4.11
>    “When reviewing a document that asks IANA to create a new registry or
> change a registration policy to any policy more stringent than Expert Review
> or Specification Required, the IESG should ask for justification to ensure
> that more relaxed policies have been considered and that the strict policy
> is the right one.”
> Is the “should” normative here?

Perhaps you're confusing "normative language" with "2119 key words":
text doesn't need 2119 key words for it to be normative, and this
document quite intentionally does not cite RFC 2119.

The example you give is a perfect one to show why we're not trying to
shoehorn key words that were meant to give instructions for
interoperable protocols into a document that's giving advice for
writing and interpreting IANA Considerations.  The sentence above
means exactly what it says in English: it's advising the IESG, but it
is ultimately the IESG's decision.