Amanda, Thanks very much for the detailed recommendations and examples.
One more question: The IANA registries, when published, are in tabular form. Does that mean we should also present it in tabular form in the RFC? Thanks. -vince On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Amanda Baber via RT < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Looking at the IANA Considerations section, the sections on registration > procedures and templates look fine, but I'm not sure what is and isn't > supposed to appear in the registry. This is what I'm wondering: > > 1) Right now there's nothing telling us whether we're using every field in > the template. It would be good to see a short paragraph, maybe just a > sentence, at the end of each "Initial Registry Contents" section, that > lists the fields in the registry (even if it's just confirming that we're > using all of them). > > If you want a field included in the template but not in the registration, > you might add a short paragraph like this, with or without the last > sentence: "The XXXX registry will include the following fields: 'X', 'Y', > and 'Z'. IANA will post each registration template that is not included in > the text of an RFC." > > We could also post all RFC-based templates, or no templates at all. > > See http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters and > http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry for examples of > template-posting. > > 2) Table 1, the source for the Error Codes registry, doesn't include the > "Additional Parameters" field from the template. Should that field be left > out of the registry, or does the table need to be expanded? > > 3) Should the key that describes -100s, -200s, and -300s be included in > the registry as a note? (If so, this instruction should probably be > included in the IANA Considerations section.) > > 4) If any other registries include a "Value" or "Code" field, please note > the maximum value of the available range, and note whether the value "0" is > "Unassigned" (available for assignment) or "Reserved" (unavailable). > > 5) Each of the registrations in section 9.1.2 has a heading that isn't > part of the template: "FCC ID," "FCC Device Type," etc. Should these be > included in the registry? If so, a line for "description" (or a better > term) needs to be added to the registration template. If not, it might be > better to number these headings. > > Finally, I have a few questions about formatting The PAWS Ruleset ID > registry. > > 1) This is divided into two sections in the document. Should it be > presented as two separate registries, or reflected in the registry somehow? > > 2) Will the "Additional message parameters" field be included in the > registry? If not, that needs to be noted, but if so, there are a couple of > ways I can think of to present it there. One is to use the format the IPFIX > Information Elements registry uses for its Description field (scroll down > to value 6 or so): > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix > > The other approach I can think of is the one the "Header Field Parameters > and Parameter Values" registry takes at > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters > > In this case, you would need to break the registrations up into one > Additional message parameter for each Ruleset ID. That is, one registration > for "ETSI-EN-301-598-1.0.0-draft" with "manufacturerId: Specifies a > device's manufacturer's identifier. It is a REQUIRED parameter in > DeviceDescriptor (Section 5.2).," one registration for > "ETSI-EN-301-598-1.0.0-draft" with "modelId: Specifies a device's model > identifier. It is a REQUIRED parameter in DeviceDescriptor (Section 5.2), > " etc. > > thanks, > Amanda > > On Tue Jan 28 02:54:56 2014, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Link: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-paws-protocol-08.txt > > > > We're in the process of finalizing the draft and would like some advice > on > > the formatting of the > > "9. IANA Considerations" section (modeled after > > RFC6749<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6749> > > ) > > > > It defines 3 registries and each follows the format: > > - Defines creation of registry with process of updating it > > - Defines Registration Template > > - Defines initial contents of the registry > > > > Is this acceptable? or should it be in a tabular format? > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > -- -vince
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
