Re: Last call comments on LTRU registry and initialization documents

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



John C Klensin <john dash ietf at jck dot com> wrote:

> The success or failure of the "foo" registry is
> not evaluated on how many foos we can put in to it, or its
> comprehensiveness relative to some external foo-list, but on
> whether it does the job that the foo-protocol (and maybe foo1,
> foo2, etc.), requires.  Normally, we don't even write a "create
> the baz registry" document.  Instead, we write a "baz protocol
> specification" document and include a more or less long section
> that instructs IANA to create the registry, what to put in it,
> and how.

So, do you propose that we withdraw the specification of the initial
registry contents, all 963 tags and subtags, and replace it with a set
of instructions to IAN on how they can duplicate our work?  And cross
our fingers that they get it right, or prepare to go through
item-languages for any correctible errors or omissions they may
introduce, and live with the uncorrectable errors?  Just wondering.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]