John, you made a transcription error. The code should be X.1.10.
In draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-10, it's listed as 5.1.TBD, and IANA
assigned a 10 to the TBD.
On 4/14/15 4:38 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Tuesday, April 14, 2015 12:21 -0700 Ned Freed
No doubt I'm missing something obvious, but where do I see
this comments on the new datatracker?
In the "History" tab. Trouble is that the IANA review isn't
well marked (never has been).
So today's message refers to the comments made two weeks ago?
This seems odd, but OK.
Ned (and others),
That aside, the real issue here is that someone needs to check
the extended code and either reassure IANA that it is correct
(and that the document should say "register the code") or tell
them (and me) that I made a typographical or transcription
error. As I've told Barry and a few others, my IETF time is
completely tied up with URNBIS, some closely-related issues
(including whether or note the URI scheme registration document
has important side-effects), and some IAB-related stuff. If
I'm not actually on travel, I would have time to patch some text
into the otherwise-ready-to-go -06 of this document, but not the
bandwidth to study the extended codes. If someone who is closer
to them than I am could do that, we could probably get this
document cleared rather than wondering what is happening with it.
ietf-smtp mailing list