> -----Original Message----- > From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:aamelni...@fastmail.fm] > Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2018 1:01 PM > To: Jim Schaad <i...@augustcellars.com>; The IESG <i...@ietf.org> > Cc: draft-ietf-ace-cbor-web-to...@ietf.org; ace-cha...@ietf.org; > ka...@mit.edu; ace@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-ace-cbor-web- > token-12: (with COMMENT) > > On Sun, Mar 4, 2018, at 7:39 PM, Jim Schaad wrote: > > IANA does ask for the expert review as part of the processing it does > > even for standards track documents. This is because, in part, they > > are responsible for doing the final number assignment. That is which > > number in the range is actually used. The interesting question would > > be what happens if the IESG and the DEs disagree about such things. > > This is exactly why I am asking about this. It might also possible to game the > system to ask IESG approval of a Proposed Standard that bypasses Expert > Review.
Interesting. The text that IANA and I finally agreed to for the COSE Algorithm registry is "Standards Action With Expert Review". That would make sure that it cannot bypass the Expert Review. Jim > > > I would > > expect that this would result in a long discussion with some type of > > final agreement between them. > > > > Jim > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:aamelni...@fastmail.fm] > > > Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2018 11:19 AM > > > To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org> > > > Cc: draft-ietf-ace-cbor-web-to...@ietf.org; ace-cha...@ietf.org; > > > ka...@mit.edu; ace@ietf.org > > > Subject: Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on > > > draft-ietf-ace-cbor-web-token- > > > 12: (with COMMENT) > > > > > > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for > > > draft-ietf-ace-cbor-web-token-12: No Objection > > > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to > > > all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to > > > cut this introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > > > > Please refer to > > > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-cbor-web-token/ > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > COMMENT: > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > > > Just to double check: a CWT claim registration from a Proposed > > > Standard still needs to be submitted to the review mailing list, but > > > it is not really subject to Expert Review, correct? You might want to make > it clearer. > > > > _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
