Hi Mike,
At 11:49 AM 25-03-2024, Michael StJohns wrote:
Context for the IETF list. A set of IANA notes were included in
RFC8447 that allowed IDs to be considered as satisfying
"Specification Required" for the purpose of issuing code points in
IANA registries. The IANA requires stable references for a
Specification Required. However, to quote from the ID
boilerplate, "It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
These two seem to be in conflict.
The "Specification Required" policy is defined in "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs" (BCP 26) as a formal
public specification. The BCP also contains some information about
the intent behind the policy. I'll quote some text from the BCP as
it may easier for the occassional reader:
"Publication of an RFC is an ideal means of achieving this
requirement, but Specification Required is intended to also
cover the case of a document published outside of the RFC path,
including informal documentation."
There is also another policy which states "RFC Required" which is a
bar higher in comparison with "Specification Required".
The "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS" (RFC 8447) is on the
Standards Track. The RFC is about instructions for the designed
experts and IANA. Section 12, for example, states that "It is
sufficient to have an Internet-Draft (that is posted and never
published as an RFC) or a document from another standards body,
industry consortium, university site, etc."
There is a conflict between BCP 26 and RFC 8447.
I copied my comments to the document shepherd and Responsible Area
Director for RFC 8447 in case they may be able to help with the above query.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
