IETF Logo Mail Archive

[urn] NID registration policy (was: Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-blanchet-urn-ianachange-00.txt)

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Wed, 31 July 2013 12:39 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D828921F873C for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.434
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.165, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FRorVe9-lxyB for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E97A21F8C4B for <urn@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from che-vpn-cluster-2-489.cisco.com (unknown [198.135.0.233]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C11EC40046; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:41:03 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <51F90556.5020205@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:38:46 +0200
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
References: <20130731115043.24006.31384.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2D26CCA9-73B8-4F29-8AA9-25A11C824AD0@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <2D26CCA9-73B8-4F29-8AA9-25A11C824AD0@viagenie.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "urn@ietf.org" <urn@ietf.org>
Subject: [urn] NID registration policy (was: Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-blanchet-urn-ianachange-00.txt)
X-BeenThere: urn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Revisions to URN RFCs <urn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/urn>
List-Post: <mailto:urn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:39:49 -0000

On 7/31/13 1:55 PM, Marc Blanchet wrote:

> making
> registration of urn formal namespace much less burden on IESG by having
> Expert review.  

We will discuss this on Friday, but here are some considerations:

The current RFC 5226 policy ("IETF Consensus") requires publication of
an RFC that is approved for publication by the IESG. This means that an
Area Director needs to sponsor it, it needs to undergo IETF Last Call, etc.

A less restrictive policy would be "RFC Required". This means that
someone could, for instance, publish an RFC through the Independent
Submissions stream, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html

An even less restrictive policy would be "Specfication Required", which
means that someone could publish a document via some other standards
development organization (or even a stable website - the rules are a bit
fuzzy).

A yet more loose policy would be "Expert Review", which in practice
means that someone would simply need to send a completed template to the
urn-nid@ietf.org list.

In any case, I think we need to provide guidelines to reviewers (since
in all cases review happens on the urn-nid list). Here is a document
that provides similar guidelines for another IANA registry:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipfix-ie-doctors/

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email