Re: update on draft-meadors-ediint-features-header and IANA review requested
Graham Klyne <[email protected]> Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:53:14 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ediint |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Alexey Melnikov wrote: > Hi Kyle, > > Kyle Meadors wrote: > >> To confirm, my next step would be to resubmit a new version of this draft >> but include this section below in the IANA consideration section. >> > Yes. > >> Question: >> do I need to specific the protocol as AS2/AS1/AS3 or HTTP/mail? >> >> This is a request for a permanent header registration. If it's a request for permanent registration, I'd be looking for adequate evidence of IETF consensus - a note from you (Alexey) would suffice. (Otherwise, I'd recommend registration as provisional until any applicable last-call process has been completed, with a view to promoting it at that point.) >> Header field name: EDIINT-Features >> Applicable protocol: AS2 (RFC 4130), AS1 (RFC 3335), AS3 (RFC 4823) >> >> > I think this should be one or more of "mail", "http" (per RFC 3864): > > Applicable protocol: > Specify "mail" (RFC 2822), "mime" (RFC 2045), "http" (RFC 2616), > "netnews" (RFC 1036), or cite any other standards-track RFC > defining the protocol with which the header is intended to be > used. Agreed. The comments about use with AS2, etc, would usefully be included in the "Related information" section of the template. >> Status: Informational >> Author/Change controller: IETF If this is "informational", is it properly under IETF change control? Or is there an EDIInt consortium or body that can more usefully be cited? >> Specification document(s): This I-D (will include a URI) As a process detail, I think the actual registration would then have to take place during the IANA considerations processing phase of RFC publication? Thus, I think we need to be clear that there's adequate consensus for a permanent registration before activating the publication process. That's an IESG call to make. >> Related information: None. #g -- >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Graham Klyne [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 12, >> 2010 2:17 AM >> To: Kyle Meadors >> Cc: 'Nevil Brownlee'; [email protected]; 'Alexey Melnikov' >> Subject: Re: update on draft-meadors-ediint-features-header and IANA >> review >> requested >> >> Dear all, >> >> My apologies for the delay in dealing with this. >> >> My main comment is that there is no registration template per >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3864. Normally, I would expect to see >> this template included in the IANA considerations section (which, as >> it stands, >> isn't really about IANA considerations per se, but a request for >> expert review - I >> >> think there may be a related process issue here which I'll raise >> separately >> with Alexey), or submitted separately to IANA per >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3864#ref-35 >> >> For example, it's not clear to me if this is requesting provisional or >> permanent registration. >> >> I also note that the registration procedure is not cited, which would >> probably be helpful, though I'm not sure that's a requirement. >> >> As for the header field itself, I see no problem with it. >> >> #g >> -- >> >> >> Kyle Meadors wrote: >> >> >>> Alexey, Nevil, >>> >>> >>> >>> I have made the changes to the BNF and other comments and re-submit >>> my I-D. >>> >>> >>> >>> Graham, >>> >>> >>> >>> Per conversation with Alexey, I am requesting an IANA expert review >>> on a registering a new http and email header, EDIINT-Features. The >>> request is in the I-D listed below. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> >>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-meadors-ediint-features-header/ >>> >>> >>> >>> Kyle Meadors >>> >>> Drummond Group Inc. >>> >>> Director of EHR Testing >>> >>> Principal, Test Process >>> >>> 817-709-1627 >>> >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> >>> Calendar: http://tinyurl.com/KyleMeadors-DGI-Calendar >>> >>> >>> >>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * >>> >>> CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER >>> >>> This email, including attachments, is confidential and proprietary. >>> It constitutes exclusive communication solely to the addressee. Any >>> entity other than the intended addressee is prohibited from use of >>> this communication for any purpose. This email, including >>> attachments, may not be distributed, whole or in part. >>> >>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * >>>