Assuming that there actually is a contradiction here (and I don't know anything about IPFIX so I won't hazard a guess) the end result is a quality-control problem that should be brought to the attention of the RFC Editor. If I understand your comments below correctly, you're encouraging document authors and reviewers to have better attention to detail, which I agree is also a good takeaway. Finally, please remember this example the next time you're tempted to complain about how long it takes the RFC Editor and/or IANA to take action on a document. Reasonable concerns about processing timeliness aside, y'all are not so easy to work with as you would sometimes like to believe. :) Doug Tom.Petch wrote: > Looking at RFC5102 (IPFIXinfo), it, like many RFC, has normative definitions > in the body of the document and a non-normative appendix, which, since it > brings the definitions together, is easier and so more likely to be used. > > Indeed, the IANA considerations, s.7, tell IANA to register the non-normative > appendix which is fine as long as the two are in step but what happens when they > are not? > > In fact, they do differ slightly. > > The IANA considerations register > URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:ipfix-info-15 > XML: See Appendix B for this document. > > whereas Appendix B says that the name is > <schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:ipfix-info" > which is what is in the IANA registry. > > IANA have used Appendix B and so have got the right answer > by doing the 'wrong' thing. > > (Interestingly the last I-D of this document had, in Appendix B, > <schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:ipfix-info-10" > xmlns:ipfix="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:ipfix-info-10") > > What if an error is discovered in the body of the document (I have not looked > at it in any detail) and an erratum is raised against it? Does this implicitly > request IANA to update the registry? Does it matter whether the erratum is > against the appendix or the body of the document? > > (I think this is called the distributed database problem:-) > > Tom Petch > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf