Hi Dale, On 10/21/2013 06:09 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote: >> From: [email protected] (Dale R. Worley) >> >>> From: Suresh Krishnan <[email protected]> >> >>> Minor >>> ===== >>> >>> * Please add an IANA considerations section to the draft stating that >>> the draft requires no IANA actions. >> >> Of the 972 RFCs numbered from 6000 to 6999, 495 are "Standards Track". >> Of those, 394 have an "IANA Considerations" section and 101 do not. >> >> So at this point, it seems to me that the convention is that an "IANA >> Considerations" section is not needed if there are no IANA >> considerations. If I get pushback from the IESG on this, I'll revise >> my position. > > It turns out I'm wrong on that. The "Document Lifecycle Tutorial" > (http://www.ietf.org/edu/documents/82DocumentLifecycleTutorial-Hagens.pdf) > page 27 states that an IANA Considerations section is required in all > drafts. This is to ensure that all draft authors consider whether > there are any IANA considerations. (A "No IANA Considerations" > section will be removed by the RFC Editor.) > > I've updated the draft to insert an IANA Considerations section.
Thanks Dale. With this change both my comments have been addressed. I am guessing the changes would be reflected in version -15. Cheers Suresh _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
