[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Harald,
Many thanks for reviewing this draft.
This document does 2 things:
- Register an extension to pass implementation identities around
- Change the registration requirement for extensions to allow
Experimental extensions to be registered
It also instructs IANA to correct some registry problems.
Yes, I saw that - and thought that this was a strange way of sending bug
reports to IANA - but since the text said that this was to be removed
before publication, I didn't comment on it.
1) I read RFC 3720 section 13.5.2 as saying that publication
of extensions as standards-track is allowed, even though the
wording is quite convoluted. So the implication of the
language in section 5 that it was previously restricted to
informational only seems unwarranted.
The WG and the editor of the draft that became RFC 3270 do not
share your view of the convoluted wording, and regard this draft
as making a change to the process requirements in RFC 3270.
At a minimum, this draft unambiguously states what is allowed.
Lars pointed out that I'd actually missed one section of 3720. That
section was clearer in what it was not saying - section 13.5.2 actually
mentions standards track, but 12.22 doesn't. So a fix that points at
both sections would be a Good Thing.
2) It would be good if section 5 of this draft pointed
specifically at section 13.5.2 of RFC 3720 as the section to
be updated, and provided specific language to be read as
"this section is now replaced by". I *think* the text only
means that the words "as an informational RFC" are changed to
"as an informational or experimental RFC, as appropriate",
but it would be nice to be 100% certain that this is the
intended effect, and that no other section of RFC 3720 needs
changing (my scan of 3720 might have overlooked something).
I believe your thinking is correct, and I will supply the Area
Director (Lars) with an appropriate RFC Editor Note.
Excellent!
Many thanks to the Gen-ART process and the people who make it
happen, as this draft would have been far less likely to receive
this caliber of IETF Last Call review in Gen-ART's absence.
Thanks,
--David (ips WG chair & shepherd for this draft)
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
