Re: [NSIS] Draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp: Late change of IANA consideration section

[Thomas Narten <[e-mail]>]

> I do not understand this either, but I'll note that draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp 
> has a ton of Standards Action IANA rules. It does not make sense to have 
> such rules in a spec that itself is going for Experimental.

Well, this problem stems from the fact that the IETF produces all
sorts of  "mini-documents", and the appropriate status for individual
"mini-documents" is often fairly specific (e.g., BCP vs. Standards
vs. info, etc.).

But we often put them all in one document and don't worry so much
about whether the overall category of document is right for each
individual "mini-document" within the document.

I.e., one could argue that all IANA considerations should be BCPs (and
they usually are when they are standalone), but we don't ask standards
track documents to move the IANA considerations to a separate document
just to make all our categories look clean... (and for good reason!)

Thomas