Seems reasonable, see https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4239
On Sat, Oct 17, 2020, at 01:44, Magnus Westerlund wrote: > Hi, > > While reviewing draft-ietf-quic-http I actually realized an issue that do > touches upon transport and its IANA policy so I did open a new issue on > Transport: > > https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4230 > > Section 22.1.1: > > It is quite common that one may want to separate who has the change control > over an registration entry vs who is the contact. Change control can often be > assigned to an organization rather than an individual while a contact > information may be an individual or a specific contact address for the > organization. Contact information has a tendency to get stale, and in many > case the contact if a person may no longer represent the organization that > made the registration. > > Thus, my suggestion would be to add a separation between contact and change > controller. In fact just for the registration in the Transport doc it makes > sense to make the change controller "IETF" and have the contact be "QUIC WG". > > Cheers > > Magnus > > Attachments: > * smime.p7s
