Consensus found on external references in Enumservice Registrations

Dear ENUM WG

We can declare consensus on option numer 3).

Still open issue:
Will 'draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis' deal with the escrow 
copy stuff, or do we need to handle this in enumservices-guide (as well as 
e.g. Ed in the DNS extensions document and so on)?

cheers,
  Bernie


On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:

> Hi Ed, Thomas, Harald et al.
>
> Interesting approach IANA to hold an escrow copy.
>
> I would suggest, that this should go to
> draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis
> as it is an issue that applies to all cases with "specification required".
>
> What do the authors of rfc2434bis (Thomas, Harald) think about?
>
> cheers,
> Bernie
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Edward Lewis wrote:
>
>> At 14:24 +0100 1/15/08, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:
>> 
>>> 3) Add an exact (external) reference to specification in the IANA
>>> template for Enumservice registrations. Leave the rest to the narten I-D.
>> 
>> Number 3.
>> 
>>> Questions? Comments? Opinions?
>> 
>> I would add this: if the document is not an RFC then IANA will hold in 
>> escrow a copy of the document.  Not republish it, but have a copy available 
>> in case the document is no longer accessible via other means.
>> 
>> This is the path we will take for the DNS document I wrote about.
>> 
>> If the document is static, that's sufficient.  If the document is still 
>> alive, then IANA ought to hold in escrow the latest copy.  (How IANA is 
>> alerted to get a new copy I'm not saying now.)