Pascal Thubert (pthubert) writes:
> CC ing Amanda for clarification on "RFC Required".
> For all I know, with "RFC required", the IANA must also request
> that the IESG designate an expert to review the new registration.
> The difference if I am correct is that "RFC required" adds limit the
> use of the IETF IE only to address requests from IETF
> specifications.
> Amanda: is this correct?
I do not think that is correct. When using specification required,
then designated expert is also needed to say whether the specification
is clear enough etc.
When using RFC required, then any RFC is enough, including RFC Editor
Independent submission. There is no expert needed, as the RFCs are
considered to be good enough documents.
>From RFC 5226:
RFC Required - RFC publication (either as an IETF submission or as
an RFC Editor Independent submission [RFC3932]) suffices.
Unless otherwise specified, any type of RFC is sufficient
(e.g., Informational, Experimental, Standards Track, etc.).
> Tero: Do you think you need assignments for use outside the IETF?
No. This is IETF IE, there should not be any assignments outside the
IETF.
> Or that a value could be assigned without an RFC?
Most likely not, but expert review makes the early allocations easier,
as experts are usually experts in those registries they take care of,
and can say whether the document is ready enough to get early
allocations (they are not really early allocations as that case, as
early allocations only cover the rfc required etc cases).
When using RFC required, the working group chairs and area director
will make that decision. While we still have working groups, then
there is most likely enough expertise there too, but after WGs are
closed down, there might be issues.
--
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
