Re: enum services registry question

Hi Ed,

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Edward Lewis wrote:

> At 11:27 +0100 1/7/08, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:
>> On the other hand, this looks like an issue to be solved on rfc2434bis
>> level. (I therefore have CC:ed the authors of rfc2434bis to this email.)
>
> Do you have a URL for that document?

http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis-08.txt
(BTW: This URL was already in my last email....)

>> Propsosal:
>>
>>  Unless there is some better solution proposed, I'll put a section
>>  "reference" to the new IANA template in
>>  draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide.
>>  There can be either a reference to the RFC or an IANA internal reference
>>  to the version of the specification after approval by the experts.
>
> The issue is the "IANA internal reference" as I mentioned before.

I don't think it is impossible to convince IANA to maintain such a 
document base. However, this certainly needs to be discussed with IANA 
and the authors of rfc2434bis.

>> PS: It would be quite a bit easier, if we decided on "RFC required"
>> instead...;-)
>
> It certainly would be easier, but that means the RFC-Editor and IETF are 
> creating a monopoly on what goes into IANA.  I believe that is undesired by 
> the powers that be.  (I think the same was said in the DNS group talking 
> about their IANA instructions "bis" document.)

I do not see a monopoly issue here. AFAIK everybody can publish an 
informational RFC as an individual submission and I do not see a valid 
reason for the RFC editor to object an Enumservice registration document. 
Or do I miss anything here?

cheers,
  Bernie