Hi Barry, Here is a problem I encounter with the registration policy due to IESG not verifying the policy for registration. The first registry requires standard action
http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-security-descriptions/sdp-security-descriptions.xhtml#sdp-security-descriptions-3 This one has specification required http://www.iana.org/assignments/srtp-protection/srtp-protection.xhtml this one has IETF Review or IESG Approval http://www.iana.org/assignments/mikey-payloads/mikey-payloads.xhtml#mikey-payloads-28 Yet these three are similar and a cipher will register in all three but may need different documents instead of one to register the cypher suite. This is a real problem and we ended up with one Informational and one standard track document. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-aria-srtp-09 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-aria-sdes-01 I think that there should be normative language to the IESG to verify consistency Roni > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Barry Leiba > Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 3:49 PM > To: Roni Even > Cc: General Area Review Team; draft-leiba-cotton-iana- > [email protected]; IETF discussion list > Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis > > Hi, Roni, and thanks for the review. > > > I am wondering about the lack of normative language for example in > > section > > 4.11 > > > > “When reviewing a document that asks IANA to create a new registry > > or change a registration policy to any policy more stringent than > > Expert Review or Specification Required, the IESG should ask for > > justification to ensure that more relaxed policies have been > > considered and that the strict policy is the right one.” > > > > Is the “should” normative here? > > Perhaps you're confusing "normative language" with "2119 key words": > text doesn't need 2119 key words for it to be normative, and this document > quite intentionally does not cite RFC 2119. > > The example you give is a perfect one to show why we're not trying to > shoehorn key words that were meant to give instructions for interoperable > protocols into a document that's giving advice for writing and interpreting > IANA Considerations. The sentence above means exactly what it says in > English: it's advising the IESG, but it is ultimately the IESG's decision. > > Barry _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
