Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
That's not what "IETF Consensus" means in the context of
RFC 2434:
IETF Consensus - New values are assigned through the IETF
consensus process. Specifically, new assignments are made via
RFCs approved by the IESG. Typically, the IESG will seek
input on prospective assignments from appropriate persons
(e.g., a relevant Working Group if one exists).
Okay, so we're being overly anal here. Like we can control the world
of protocol extensions.
I hope people noted Tim's words:
If publication of draft-housley-tls-authz is approved by the IESG but
delayed in deference to working group activities, I intend to request
early IANA assignment. This will permit experimental use of this
publication while the standards track publication is under development.
In other words: Tim does NOT want to try to block the codepoint
registration, even if the document's publication as an RFC is delayed.
I kind of agree with Ned's point about trying to regulate the world of
what we don't like by refusing to list things with IANA that we know
exist (that is, it's stupid), but this isn't what Tim (and, hopefully,
the IESG) is trying to do in this case.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf