Hi, Roni, and thanks for the review.
I am wondering about the lack of normative language for example in section
4.11
“When reviewing a document that asks IANA to create a new registry or
change a registration policy to any policy more stringent than Expert Review
or Specification Required, the IESG should ask for justification to ensure
that more relaxed policies have been considered and that the strict policy
is the right one.”
Is the “should” normative here?
Perhaps you're confusing "normative language" with "2119 key words":
text doesn't need 2119 key words for it to be normative, and this
document quite intentionally does not cite RFC 2119.
The example you give is a perfect one to show why we're not trying to
shoehorn key words that were meant to give instructions for
interoperable protocols into a document that's giving advice for
writing and interpreting IANA Considerations. The sentence above
means exactly what it says in English: it's advising the IESG, but it
is ultimately the IESG's decision.
Barry