Hi Barry,
Here is a problem I encounter with the registration policy due to IESG not
verifying the policy for registration.
The first registry requires standard action
http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-security-descriptions/sdp-security-descriptions.xhtml#sdp-security-descriptions-3
This one has specification required
http://www.iana.org/assignments/srtp-protection/srtp-protection.xhtml
this one has IETF Review or IESG Approval
http://www.iana.org/assignments/mikey-payloads/mikey-payloads.xhtml#mikey-payloads-28
Yet these three are similar and a cipher will register in all three but may
need different documents instead of one to register the cypher suite.
This is a real problem and we ended up with one Informational and one standard
track document.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-aria-srtp-09
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-aria-sdes-01
I think that there should be normative language to the IESG to verify
consistency
Roni
-----Original Message-----
From: barryleiba(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
[mailto:barryleiba(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of
Barry Leiba
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 3:49 PM
To: Roni Even
Cc: General Area Review Team; draft-leiba-cotton-iana-
5226bis(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org; IETF discussion list
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis
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