Muchas Gracias Coupon redeemed as [IANA #1160164] :
From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: Request for Assignment Contact Name: Toerless Eckert Contact Email: [email protected] Type of Assignment: Early Assignment , approved by Warren Kumari https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/4JJjhztdmvh0uqvc0NuM4pIzhhE Registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml#security-smime-1 Description: required for interop testing of prototypes implementing the subject WG draft. Additional Info: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher-05#section-9.5 On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:11:04AM -0500, Warren Kumari wrote: > Approved. > > (This approval coupon can be redeemed for a codepoint at any IANA location, > or online. No warranty expressed or implied. Some rights reserved, some > exclusions apply, etc :-)) > > W > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 4:36 AM Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear Ignaz, dear Warren, > > > > As chairs of the ANIMA WG, we hereby request your AD approval > > for early allocation of a code point from IANA according to RFC7120. > > > > Draft: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher-05 > > > > > ## The SMI Security for S/MIME CMS Content Type Registry > > > > > > This document registers an OID in the "SMI Security for S/MIME CMS > > > Content Type" registry (1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.1), with the value: > > > > > > Decimal Description References > > > ------- -------------------------------------- ---------- > > > TBD1 id-ct-animaCBORVoucher [ThisRFC] > > > > Registry: > > > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml#security-smime-1 > > > > The ANIMA WG chairs have verified that the required conditions for > > early allocation from RFC7120, Section 2 are met: > > > > a) Standards Action (document is standards track ANIMA WG draft) > > > > b) The WG draft adequately describes the desired semantics: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher-05 > > > > c) The WG participants actively working on implementations of the > > draft have confirmed that the semantic of the code point is > > stable to the extend that it is clear that the final > > RFC will need it, but further validation through more interoperability > > testing is required and only blocked on the availability of an early > > allocation > > code point. > > > > d) The working group chairs think that it would be highly helpful to > > receive an early allocation code point now to support further > > interoperability testing, ensuring that the final RFC has the > > highest level of practical vetting. > > > > The request for early allocation was brought up in the working group > > and was faced with no disagreement. The working group chairs also > > understand that there is no risk of depletion of the registry in question. > > > > Thank you very much > > Toerless (for the chairs) > > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in > the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of > pants. > ---maf > _______________________________________________ > Anima mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima -- --- [email protected] _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
