ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-melnikov-imap-keywords-06

2009-11-28 16:31:08
Samuel Weiler wrote:

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Alexey Melnikov wrote:

And for the common-use:

   Registration of an IMAP keyword intended for common use (whether or
   not they use the "$" prefix) requires Expert Review [RFC5226].  IESG
   appoints one or more Expert Reviewer, one of which is designated as
   the primary Expert Reviewer.  IMAP keywords intended for common use
   SHOULD be standardized in IETF Consensus [RFC5226] documents. ...
   In cases when an IMAP
   Keyword being registered is already deployed, Expert Reviewers
   should favour registering it over requiring perfect documentation.

Would it be better to say: "requires either IETF Consensus or Expert Review"?

Not everybody is subscribed to ietf or ietf-announce mailing lists, so I would like for all common use registrations to go through the expert.

I don't like the logic (while not everybody is subscribed to the lists, your expert surely could be,

People have complained about traffic on the ietf mailing list during plenaries.

and it's easy from an AD to punt the doc to the expert).

That part is easy, yes.

That said, since you want everything to go through the expert, to avoid confusion, I suggest removing the citation to the inapplicable 5226 metric: "IETF Consensus [RFC5226]".

Ok, I will try to clarify.

(For example: do the registrations made in this doc have to go through Expert Review?

No, because they are a part of the document that creates the registry ;-).

Isn't it enough to have them in a consensus doc?") And how do you expect the expert to encourage/enforce the SHOULD, given the "favour registering it over requiring perfect documentation" guideline? Again, the current text isn't as clear as I'd like.

This is intentional. This is a judgment call by the expert.

This sounds inconsistent.

Yes, but it is a fact of life. It is not worse than the current situation where people just deploy stuff without bring it to any standard mailing list.

I'm hearing "it's within the scope of the expert's judgement to require an IETF Consensus doc" and "In cases when an IMAP Keyword being registered is already deployed, Expert Reviewers should favour registering it over requiring perfect documentation." If I were an implementer who got told "you need a consensus doc", I'd be more than a little tempted to go ahead and deploy, then reapply for the registration.

Well, if one works for Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, etc. (not trying to pick on anybody), then one does it every time. Hopefully Expert Review is low enough bar to tempt people (if tempt is the right word here at all) to register.

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