-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Barry
Leiba
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 9:40 AM
To: Mike Jones
Cc: The IESG; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Barry Leiba's No Objection on
draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms-32: (with COMMENT)
>> 2 (the real point). I don't understand how the two sentences relate
>> to each other. The first sentence seems to say that the DE(s) can
>> change implementation requirements on their own. The second says it
>> has to be done using Specification Required (which doesn't really
>> need to be said, as that's the policy for the registry anyway).
>>
>> Which is it? If it's Specification Required, then anyone can propose
>> a change, using a specification, and the DE(s) will review that as
>> they do any other registration request.
>
> The intent is for both to be required - that a specification be
> written proposing the change and the designated experts approve the
> change. I can look into a wording change to make this clearer when
> the document is next revised.
OK, but that's just normal Specification Required. It's fine if you want to
point out that updates can also be made using the Specification Required
policy... but please avoid making it look like you're setting up something
special, as that might wind up being confusing.
Understood. I'll plan on revising the description accordingly.
Barry
Thanks again,
-- Mike
_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
