ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call on draft-ietf-pim-registry-03.txt

2011-01-13 09:51:48
13.01.2011 13:31, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 13.01.2011 10:21, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
Hello all,

Let me cite RFC 5226, that says:

<...>
Documents that create a new namespace (or modify the definition of an
existing space) and that expect IANA to play a role in maintaining
that space (e.g., serving as a repository for registered values) MUST
provide clear instructions on details of the namespace.  In
particular, instructions *MUST* include:
<...>
5) Initial assignments and reservations.  Clear instructions should be
provided to identify any initial assignments or registrations.  In
addition, any ranges that are to be reserved  for "Private Use",
"Reserved", *"Unassigned"*, etc. should be *clearly indicated*.
<...>
...

That sounds like an editorial error to me.

"any ranges to be *reserved* for .... "Unassigned"..."

doesn't make any sense at all. They are not reserved.
Yes, that is a type of error, but the meaning is that unassigned and reserved values MUST (yes, must, that is in RFC 5226; see citation below) be mentioned.

This should probably be raised as erratum.

So the document specifying the regsitry MUST mention what are
Unassigned.  Moreover, IMO, it would be useful to assign one value for
Experimentation.

No. should != must.
See below.

There are tons of registries where this is not the case; namely all or most of those where the values are strings, not numbers.
The strings registries are rather exceptions from the rule I cited above.

Mykyta


Best regards, Julian


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