[Secdispatch] Re: [dispatch] IANA policies "... with expert review" (Re: [Alldispatch] IETF-Wide Dispatch – Call for topics)

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

If this general topic is going to be put on the agenda, may I ask
that the proposal for a hybrid registration policy [3], which
addresses a very similar, and closely related issue, be placed on the
agenda and included in the discussion.

thanks,
  john klensin

[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-klensin-iana-consid-hybrid/

--On Saturday, May 25, 2024 23:14 +0200 Carsten Bormann
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 10. May 2024, at 22:13, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> If you would like time at the meeting to discuss your work or
>> ideas, please reply to this email with your request by May 24th.
> 
> I apologize for being a day late (but of course time does not
> actually advance during weekends…).
> 
> We have had a longstanding, small but tricky problem with the IANA
> registration policies defined in BCP 26: this has policies that
> involve designated experts and policies that require some IETF
> consensus (IETF review, Standards Action), but no policies that
> actually combine these requirements.
> 
> One might think that IETF consensus should be higher-ranking than
> expert review, but for some registries there is registry-specific
> knowledge that may be required for making a correct registration
> and that may be concentrated in the designated experts.  IETF
> consensus based registration sometimes circumvents that knowledge,
> which can lead to incorrect registrations or to emergency actions
> to avoid such incorrect registrations (which in turn can lead to
> port-465-style problems [2]).
> 
> The draft at [0] aims to create pre-made policies that solve this
> problem by combining IETF consensus with expert review.
> 
> This has been discussed for almost a decade, probably more during
> meetings than on mailing lists.   Finally writing this up was
> triggered by the specific instance of [1].
> 
> We would like to discuss this issue (and how well the current draft
> succeeds at addressing the issue) on the gendispatch ML, adjust the
> draft, and then have it on the agenda of the gendispatch meeting in
> Vancouver.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> 
> [0]:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bormann-gendispatch-with-expe
> rt-review-00.html
> 
> [1]:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/BENVbgmF0px40GPW-zlA4nHI
> 8So
> 
> [2]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8314
> (The 465 problem was created by a set of circumstances distinct
> from the problem we hope to solve by "…with expert review",
> but it is a rather impressive example for how long unstable
> registrations can linger if not addressed heads-on early.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]