Hi John,
At 03:28 PM 28-03-2024, John C Klensin wrote:
And that "encouragement" is another task I had in mind for this
group, directed to specs setting up new registries, i.e., having
some team in the IETF specifically tasked for reviewing such
guidance, including commenting when it is not present and
strengthening the encouragement rather than having many or most
area-designated reviewers glaze over when they reach the details
of IANA Considerations section.
I used to review the "IANA Considerations" section going through Last
Call. I have not done that in a while as there are other people to
do that work. I also went through the fuddle of a registration some
time ago. I saw people encountering some hurdle during the
registration of a code point. I commented a few times or less as
there is usually an expert to see to those things. I have not come
across any major issue over the recent years which might be
attributed to a PTI, formerly IANA, shortcoming.
There are several layers of review before the I-D proposing a new
registry or a change in registration policy reaches the IESG. It's a
bit difficult to push back against a policy which is too restrictive
when the WG has already made its mind on that.
I am currently not convinced on having a new group tasked to review
the guidance in the IANA Considerations section. In my opinion, it
would be a lot of effort to keep that group (of volunteers) working.
There is some text in BCP 26 about security vulnerabilities. The
guidance is to have a note in the relevant registration so that the
public is not misled into using that code point. I have not seen
that being done.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
