Sorry I didn't see this message, not sure why. Hmmm, how about for the sections that have the need for a specification, you add in something like:
Please excuse typos, sent from handheld device > On Sep 6, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Jim Schaad <[email protected]> wrote: > > So something along the lines of this? > > The registry is to be created as Expert Review Required. There are > additional requirements for sub-ranges of values, > where a specification may also be necessary. Expert review guidelines > are provided in Section 16.11. Thanks, Kathleen > > Jim > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: COSE [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kathleen Moriarty >> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 12:22 PM >> To: Jim Schaad <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [COSE] AD review of draft-ietf-cose-msg >> >>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Jim Schaad <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: COSE [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kathleen >>>> Moriarty >>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 11:01 AM >>>> To: Jim Schaad <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [COSE] AD review of draft-ietf-cose-msg >>>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Jim Schaad <[email protected]> > wrote: >>>>>> Section 16.2 >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it's a little confusing to state the registry values >>>>>> require expert review, then buried in the 'label' description say >>>>>> it can be >>> specification >>>> required. >>>>>> Wouldn't it be more clear to state that a dependency exists and a >>>>>> specification is required in the intro paragraph for this section? >>>>>> This applies to the other sections that also require a >>>>>> specification as >>> it don't >>>> seem that all registries do. >>>>> >>>>> I separated this issue because I think it is potentially going to >>>>> need >>> more >>>> discussion than any of the other issues. >>>> >>>> Good, thanks. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> From the IANA point of view, I want to keep these registry rules > simple. >>> That >>>> is, I want IANA to treat the registries as if everything is expert > review. >>>>> >>>>> Given that I want to break down the label ranges. Would it makes >>>>> sense >>> to >>>> move this language from here to section 16.11 so that it is clear >>>> that >>> this will be >>>> for the expert reviewers to look at rather than for IANA to look at? >>>> >>>> Well, this just applies to section 16.2, right? If so, then I think >>>> the >>> intro to just >>>> the subsection that requires a specification should also include that >>> information. >>>> If it's buried within the subsection, I think it gets lost for the >>>> draft >>> review >>>> process. It might work out fine when it's used to add to the >>>> registry, >>> but it >>>> should be as clear as possible. If it were just in 16.11, I think >>>> that >>> would be >>>> confusing since it doesn't apply to all the registries established by >>>> this >>> draft. >>>> ANother sentence or two in the introduction should be all this >>>> requires to >>> make >>>> it more clear. WHat do you think? >>> >>> No, this issue applies to section 16.2 (Header parameters), 16.4 >>> (Algorithms), 16.5 (Key Common Parameters) and 16.8 (Elliptic Curve >>> Parameters). >> >> Oh, that's right... >> >> Since it is for more than just one section I think it could >>> merit its own bullet point in 16.11 and that would be reasonable. >>> >>> Some additional text would also work as well, but it is not a one place > fix. >> >> I think it will be more clear in each section since you can do it with > just a >> sentence in the intro. It should help avoid problems later since each > section >> adds to a registry or creates one. >> >> Thanks, >> Kathleen >> >> >>> >>> Jim >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Kathleen >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jim >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Kathleen >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> COSE mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Best regards, >> Kathleen >> >> _______________________________________________ >> COSE mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
