Re: [kitten] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-krb-spake-preauth-11: (with COMMENT)

[Russ Allbery <[e-mail]>]

Nico Williams <[e-mail]> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 10:39:32PM -0800, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

>> If I'm an implementer following a link from an IANA registration to an
>> I-D, but then there's a big colorful warning that the I-D is expired,
>> wouldn't it be reasonable for me to believe that the registration, the
>> document, or both are no longer valid?  This seems really strange to
>> me.  I would expect to find a link to something current.

[...]

> But this registry is Expert Review, which means NOT EVEN any
> specification is needed, not even an expired I-D.

I think this is the key point.  The requirement is for Expert Review.  An
I-D is a mechanism for getting expert review and documents precisely what
the expert is reviewing.  In that sense it's a lot better than some expert
reviews, where a specification may not be easy to find after the fact.

The fact that the I-D has then expired matters for stronger requirements,
like having a published standard, but it seems fairly irrelevant for
expert review.  That the I-D subsequently expired doesn't change the fact
that it received expert review, and the expired I-D is documentation of
what was reviewed at the time (and hence is still useful).

-- 
Russ Allbery ([e-mail])             <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>