Dear Harald,
At 01:14 21/07/2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
So I resorted to "here's what would happen if this was a WG list, and I
had the power of the WG chair to control the list, and because I run the
list, I'm going to make it happen".
Did you? I will not dispute here the way a proposition of your consortium
tries to exclude Open Source propositions and every further innovation from
multilingual network development area. I will just thank you to repeat you
are the private owner of a public IANA list documented by an RFC (of
yours). This is why il will not tease your "WG procedure" without proper
steps, concerted ADs, appeal, etc.
To come back to your answer: one must add RFC 2860 for registry lists which
should be/are own by the IANA.
One of the signs of a maturing organization is said to be that it relies
upon explicit rules rather than people's individual judgment. One of the
signs of an ossifying organization is said to be that it has rules for
everything.
What then to say of an organisation with 4200+ RFCs?
This shows how complex the IETF has become and the necessity documented by
many outside of an "Intenet Book" maintaining, along a clear, accepted and
stable "table of content", the matter and the experience (also included in
obsoleted ones) of these 4200 RFCs.
Brian, it also shows the necessity, IMHO, of a WG-IANA to work on the many
details of a complete review of RFC 2860, 2434, etc. extending to a
standard Registry framework management by IETF and ICANN.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf