> -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Newton <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 1:44 PM > To: Antoin Verschuren <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: I-D Action: > draft-ietf-regext-ext-registry-epp- > 01.txt
[snip] > > -Are informational RFCs allowed to use IETF namespaces? > > If you are asking about the XML registry, I believe they are allowed. [SAH] I think Antoin has identified an exception, Andy. Note this text from RFC 3688: "NOTE: in order for a URN of this type to be assigned, the item being registered MUST have been through the IETF consensus process. Basically, this means that it must be documented in a RFC." Antoin mentioned RFC 9095. It's an Informational RFC, but it was published using the Independent Submission stream. It didn't go through the IETF consensus process. My understanding of 3688 suggests that 9095 shouldn't use IETF namespace URIs because it didn't go through the IETF consensus process. If my understanding is correct, we should indeed add text to the draft to capture this case. Perhaps something like this in Section 2.1: "RFC documents published using the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) stream meet that requirement. RFC documents published using the Independent Submission stream do not meet that requirement." Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
