Re: Required doc sections (Re: [saag] Next step on web phishing draft(dr

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Thomas Narten wrote:
> > > Agreed. In my experience, the IANA does not want the I-D to contain a
> > > section entitled "IANA Considerations" if there are no actions required
> > > of the IANA.
> > Your experience does not match what IANA has stated numerous
> > times. Please see section 6.1 of
> > draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis-07.txt, which contains
> > text that IANA has a large part in crafting.
> By "my experience" I mean for example RFC 3922; during Auth48 or
> thereabouts I was told that the IANA didn't want the document to include
> an "IANA Considerations" section since there were no actions required of
> the IANA. But perhaps that was a miscommunication.
Oh, and for what it's worth I agree with the policy of requiring an
"IANA Considerations" section even if there are no actions required of
the IANA, since I think it is best to be explicit about such matters.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf