[OAUTH-WG] IANA Actions and Shepherd Writeup ... Re: AD review of draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Tue, 03 March 2015 09:50 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2921C1A1B21 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 01:50:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IILsoCUkGrkm for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 01:50:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59B7A1A1B18 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 01:50:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.131.140] ([80.92.121.102]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LjN0F-1XumUg2bT5-00dUl7; Tue, 03 Mar 2015 10:50:09 +0100
Message-ID: <54F583CF.8060109@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 10:50:07 +0100
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
References: <CAHbuEH4ZQraLnWEeJAwqHq8mKHeeXWjMCA0QjY87pUjH3DKM9A@mail.gmail.com> <D1047922-A951-4DAE-81DE-4E663DD8EC59@mit.edu> <CAHbuEH4Hf4DaWVa4giqAriH0LNcxoZb9+Ha28+j-Q-410ASG1w@mail.gmail.com> <CAHbuEH7cm=REHDPA018ZaffCFhLqVbp_QmuE_tscY5ymy22kNg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHbuEH7cm=REHDPA018ZaffCFhLqVbp_QmuE_tscY5ymy22kNg@mail.gmail.com>
OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kHMJq3t36UPOAKv2ev0s412Of7jnjXcD7"
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:QOULS2nxKHrQGbbW0DHdZdXha3ezFSCGpvPyL0ULy+BMkY7Vd/W Pqoc71vQvYseZvvvpqPVzs1EibxuXJ1gMbPes4z4uywnJbUDnQsFMAw8mpAMP3SkcrFMmEH 1z4cs9jRxEuSZcornOmW+DQyBu799MBN54xwqlQ0ySClA/6ZzeO/3wDH0m2H/MBogB2YHhK Vb3QsHcq+DHZxfTAOnqmg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/AfKVzMhD63W-V2_wdxaGOnbfdjk>
Cc: "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] IANA Actions and Shepherd Writeup ... Re: AD review of draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 09:50:16 -0000

Hi Kathleen,

the statement about the IANA actions in the shepherd writeup are indeed
incorrect. I updated the writeup.

>>         IANA Considerations:
>>         The shepherd report says that there are no actions for IANA,
>>         so this needs to be updated as the draft is the specification
>>         required to add two new entries to an existing registry,
>>         established by the parent document.  It does require DE review
>>         on the mailing list: oauth-ext-review@ietf.org
>>         <mailto:oauth-ext-review@ietf.org>
>>         If that has been done, then a pointer to the archive would be
>>         helpful.

One question: I was assuming that we would use the review list when
requests come from outside the IETF since documents that go through the
IETF OAuth working group get detailed review anyway.

I am OK with always dropping a mail to the review lists whenever new
registry entries are created. Should we do that?

Ciao
Hannes