IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ...

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Mon, 08 March 2010 18:35 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@ISI.EDU>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEBDF3A6AE3 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:35:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.289
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.289 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.310, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4SYbE-Dpk15z for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:35:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nitro.isi.edu (nitro.isi.edu [128.9.208.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38EF13A6AAF for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:35:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [75.213.84.180] (180.sub-75-213-84.myvzw.com [75.213.84.180]) (authenticated bits=0) by nitro.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o28IYScj015824 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:34:31 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B954334.2050908@isi.edu>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:34:28 -0800
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alfred ? <ah@TR-Sys.de>
References: <201003072316.AAA29042@TR-Sys.de>
In-Reply-To: <201003072316.AAA29042@TR-Sys.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigA63E21230CB20FBC56DAC83B"
X-MailScanner-ID: o28IYScj015824
X-ISI-4-69-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: huitema@microsoft.com, tcpm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ...
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:35:28 -0000

Alfred,

Alfred ? wrote:
...
> draft-ogud-iana-maintenance-words should be considered as a base
> for adding 'status' information to other IANA registries as well.

This document confuses IANA with a compliance organization.

IANA maintains registries, and provides information on the status of
those registrations where used to maintain the registry.

A compliance site may be useful, but I don't think it's in IANA's
charter. *Some* of the words in this doc may be useful, but need to come
out of some assessment of a standard - it's not possible to look at
individual components of a standard and make these decisions.

The two questions that result are:
	- who makes the assessments in the doc?
	- where is that info maintained?

We have had docs that occasionally provide roadmaps in a general sense,
but this is much deeper into what a compliance organization would
recommend for implementations, and seems out of scope for even the
IETF, AFAICT.	

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email