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

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

--On Sunday, May 26, 2024 17:39 -0400 Donald Eastlake
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> It may be of interest that in some cases blocks of parameter values
> in RFC 9542 and its predecessors back though RFC 5342 are assigned
> under a policy called, in these RFCs, "IESG Ratification". This
> provides for Expert Review and then, if the Expert approves or is
> uncertain, the final decision is made by the IESG. See Section
> 5.1.2 of
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9542/
> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9542.html#name-expert-review-and
> -iesg-ratif).

Donald,

Yes, and this is part of a problem I'm not sure whether ALLDISPATCH
wants to dig into (I've had fantasies about a separate BOF).
Carsten's draft, my draft, and your example above may all be
indicative of a broader problem.  Another part of  the problem, sort
of mentioned and partially addressed in my draft, is that there
appear to be a growing number of topics in which there is tension
between the value of trying to be sure everything relevant gets
registers and getting high-quality review and engagement.  For those
reasons and, I gather, others  with less sweeping possible
implications, it seems clear that RFC 8126 is in serious need of
reexamination and revision.

Unfortunately, at least as I understand it, a draft revision for
community discussions was promised over two years ago and has been
promised and/or requested by various ADs several times since.  The
draft has not appeared and, if progress is being made, I, at least,
have seen no sign of it: certainly there has been no I-D.

So, can we either move toward a DISPATCH session to discuss and
record issues that should be addressed in 8126bis and, to the degree
possible, a plan for getting a draft of such a document, or a session
of some sort devoted to the "IANA Considerations" question and
issues.  If the latter has to be a side meeting, would it be possible
to schedule the ALLDISPATCH session in a way that allows organizing
it and finding a good time?

best,
   john

p.s. to save some reading, at least until it is necessary, your
comment and my draft are about the same idea: taking two well-known
registration policies and combining them in a way that meets a
particular set of needs.  In the case you cite, it would be IESG
Approval if Expert Review does not work out well.  In the case I went
after, it was dealing with the tension I mentioned above by allowing
the would-be registrant to choose between "just get it registered"
(essentially FCFS) and much more serious community review with the
registry telling those looking at it whether the latter occurred.