Re: [Rfced-future] Comments on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-12

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 03:09:37PM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 3/10/22 2:40 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 02:35:58PM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/10/22 1:28 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 10.03.22 08:12, Benjamin Kaduk wrote
> >>>> It's getting late here, so maybe I'm just missing things, but while this
> >>>> does seem to be an improvement, it still seems to have somewhat of a
> >>>> mismatch with §4.3's depiction.  If I understand correctly, the RPC only
> >>>> cares about value assignments insamuch as the values being assigned get
> >>>> recorded in the RFCs being produced, and your new proposal doesn't
> >>>> mention
> >>>> documents/RFCs (other than this one) at all.
> >>>
> >>> "This document requires that the RPC document registry value
> >>> assignments made by IANA."
> >>
> >> That's pretty much what it said before, no? ;-)
> >>
> >> I suggest this in the "RPC Responsibilities" section:
> >>
> >> 14. Ensuring that RFCs accurately document registry value assignments
> >>       made by IANA.
> >>
> >> For the avoidance of doubt, we could also say the same thing under the
> >> IANA considerations.
> > 
> > That does remove the bits I was confused about, but to me it also seems to
> > change the semantics somewhat.  Namely, now the RPC is just consuming
> > things produced by IANA, which could be seen as removing the possibility to
> > coordinate on which allocations are actually to be made, from what
> > range(s), etc., that the previous text seems to have implied.  I think I
> > have seen the RPC notice things in editing that would affect what IANA
> > does, and thus am not confident that describing this as a unidirectional
> > flow would be entirely accurate.  (Whether such coordination could occur
> > between RPC and IANA in an informal manner so as to get the right thing to
> > happen anyway, is another question.)
> 
> Ah, I see, you were originally concerned about the text in Section 11, 
> not the text in Section 4.3.

Ah, yes.  I guess that got lost as the thread evolved.

> I wonder if something like this would be more accurate in §11:
> 
> "The RPC is responsible for coordinating with IANA to ensure that RFCs
> accurately document registration processes and assigned values for IANA 
> registries."

That looks good to me on first read, thanks.

-Ben