Hi, Amanda,
In my experience, at some point, IANA was instructing authors to replace
registry URLs (i.e., URLs to specific registries) with a generic pointer to
http://www.iana.org instead. This had been based on text from RFC 5226, namely
[1] and [2].
Before that there were URLs identifying the registry; and more recently as
well, the guidance has been to include the suffex-less specific URL pointing to
a registry, which is great.
If IANA guarantees that stability, URLs pointing to the specific registry are
very useful IMHO.
Thanks,
-- Carlos.
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#section-4.2
4.2. What to Put in Documents That Create a Registry
...
that it is a part of should be clearly identified. When
referring to an already existing registry, providing a URL to
precisely identify the registry is helpful. All such URLs,
however, will be removed from the RFC prior to final
publication. For example, documents could contain: [TO BE
REMOVED: This registration should take place at the following
location: http://www.iana.org/assignments/foobar-registry]
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#section-5.1
5.1. What to Put in Documents When Registering Values
Note 2: When referring to an existing registry, providing a URL
to precisely identify the registry is helpful. Such URLs,
however, should usually be removed from the RFC prior to final
publication, since IANA URLs are not guaranteed to be stable in
the future. In cases where it is important to include a URL in
the document, IANA should concur on its inclusion.
On Aug 1, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Amanda Baber
<amanda(_dot_)baber(_at_)icann(_dot_)org> wrote:
Hi,
The link in RFC3315 is actually incorrect -- it should have been
http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers, without the file
extension, and there's an erratum about this. HTML was generally (if not
exclusively) reserved for files that needed to include links to registration
forms .
As Barry said, we do intend to keep that same short
http://www.iana.org/assignments/example format working for every current
page, even the newly-created ones. We also prefer to see that format used in
documents, since we can't guarantee that the file extension used for the long
version won't change. (This information will be appearing on the website in
some form.)
Also, if you find that a formerly-valid URL (like one that used to have an
.html exception) isn't redirecting to the current page, please report it to
iana(_at_)iana(_dot_)org. A redirect should have been set up.
thanks,
Amanda Baber
IANA Request Specialist
ICANN
On Wed Jul 31 14:06:28 2013, barryleiba(_at_)computer(_dot_)org wrote:
I just followed http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers.html
From RFC3315 (DHCPv6)'s reference section. Ten years later, the URL
doesn't work.
I know that things were reworked when we went to XML based storage, but
I thought that the old URLs would at least have a 301 error on them.
I discovered that dropping the .html gets me the right data at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers
Yes: that's the form that IANA would like you to use. They changed
their registries from HTML to XML, and the URLs changed. Supposed
they should decide to turn them all into JSON (aieeeeeeeee!)... the
URLs would change again. But the suffix-less version will always
work.
When I've done AD reviews of documents that cite IANA URLs, I've given
the authors that feedback, and suggested the change to the suffix-less
URLs. I also intend to suggest to IANA (thanks to a document author,
and I've since forgotten who it was; sorry) that they post permalinks
in all the registries, so people will know which URL they ought to
use, and not have to guess.
Barry, Applications AD
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail