Re: [Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1113784] General Request for Assignment (tls-extensiontype-values)

[Yoav Nir <[e-mail]>]

Yes. I don’t think there’s any better reference.

> On 26 Jun 2018, at 0:26, Amanda Baber via RT <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Yoav and Rich,
> 
> Can you confirm that we should list RFC 1945 as the reference?
> 
> thanks,
> Amanda
> 
> On Sat Jun 23 12:28:10 2018, [e-mail] wrote:
>> I agree it's fine.
>> 
>> On 6/23/18, 5:26 AM, "Yoav Nir" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi, Amanda.
>> 
>> I haven’t seen the original email, and can’t find it in my inbox.
>> 
>> Anyway, the assignments seem fine to me.
>> 
>> Rich?  Nick?
>> 
>> Yoav
>> 
>>> On 23 Jun 2018, at 3:17, Amanda Baber via RT <iana-prot-param-
>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Mike,
>>> 
>>> Our understanding is that the review period for TLS requests is three
>>> weeks:
>>> 
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-
>>> 05#section-18
>>> 
>>> I can confirm that the message below was received by the mailing
>>> list.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Amanda Baber
>>> Lead IANA Services Specialist
>>> 
>>> On Fri Jun 22 20:41:55 2018, [e-mail] wrote:
>>>> I haven't seen any follow-up e-mails regarding this.  Is there any
>>>> other information required in order to add this registration?  For
>>>> additional reference, https://github.com/w3c/resource-
>>>> timing/issues/122 and
>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=780640#c6 are
>>>> the issues where this gap in the registry is causing questions.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Amanda Baber via RT [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 2:33 PM
>>>> To: Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>
>>>> Subject: [IANA #1113784] General Request for Assignment (tls-
>>>> extensiontype-values_
>>>> 
>>>> Dear Mike,
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for contacting us. We've sent this on to the new team of
>>>> IESG-designated experts. The Application-Layer Protocol Negotiation
>>>> (ALPN) Protocol IDs registry will be updated soon to include a link
>>>> to
>>>> recently-approved document draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates,
>>>> which
>>>> provides new instructions for submitting registration requests for
>>>> some of the TLS registries. Specifically, in the future, new
>>>> requests
>>>> should be sent to a mailing list (rather than IANA) for a three-week
>>>> review period. The experts will then contact us if they approve a
>>>> registration.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Amanda Baber
>>>> Lead IANA Services Specialist
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu Jun 14 17:27:37 2018, [e-mail] wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Contact Name:
>>>>> Mike Bishop
>>>>> 
>>>>> Contact Email:
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> 
>>>>> Type of Assignment:
>>>>> Registration of "http/0.9" and "http/1.0" tokens (both protocols
>>>>> are
>>>>> defined by https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1945)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Registry:
>>>>> Application-Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) Protocol ID
>>>>> 
>>>>> Description:
>>>>> These legacy protocols are used in testing and by older server
>>>>> implementations and these tokens are already used in certain cases.
>>>>> The W3C resource-timing specification uses the ALPN registry as a
>>>>> reference for possible protocol values, and there has been some
>>>>> confusion caused by the fact that these tokens aren't actually
>>>>> registered.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It would simplify the community's life if these tokens, already in
>>>>> de
>>>>> facto use, were actually registered and had an appropriate
>>>>> specification reference.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Additional Info:
>>>>> http://www.iana.org/go/rfc7301
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> tls-reg-review mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls-reg-review
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tls-reg-review mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls-reg-review