Given that the author is the same for RFC 7519, RFC 8414 and this document,
I don't know that this says much. I believe that in part people are trying
to duplicate the behavior of registering media types and perhaps not doing a
good job.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of
The issue isn't using a mailing list. The issue is the instructions
to IANA about how to do management and tracking, stuff that they do
just fine without working groups trying -- will all good intentions --
to tell them how.
The fact that there are a lot of RFCs that do it just says that
working
The practice of using a mailing list for registration requests to enable public
visibility of them goes back at least to .well-known URI registrations
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5785 by Mark Nottingham in April 2010. OAuth
2.0 followed this practice in RFC 6749, as did the JOSE specs and
These are all quite recents examples, so maybe the procedures are changing at
the moment. I guess we as the IESG should be aware and figure out what the
right procedure actually should be here.
> On 28. Oct 2019, at 16:31, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:42PM -0400,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31:42PM -0400, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Yeh, it's very common for authors to try to tell IANA how to handle
> registrations, and I often push back on that as inappropriate. There
> are certainly special conditions that IANA should be told about, but
> this is standard
