Re: GIST: Change of IANA Considerations: Action Type for code point allocation

Hi Magnus and all,

Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> Martin Stiemerling skrev 2010-01-25 10:53:
> 
>> **Call for WG consensus**:
>> Is anybody objecting that the IANA actions in draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-20 currently requiring "Standards Action" are changed to "Expert Review"?
>>
>> Let the WG and me know your objections or agreement to this by January 29th 5pm CET.
>>
> 
> Actually I would suggest IETF Review, meaning that any extension must
> pass IETF last call before being published to get a codepoint.

IETF Review is fine for me.

Quote from RFC 5226:

      IETF Review - (Formerly called "IETF Consensus" in
            [IANA-CONSIDERATIONS]) New values are assigned only through
            RFCs that have been shepherded through the IESG as AD-
            Sponsored or IETF WG Documents [RFC3932] [RFC3978].  The
            intention is that the document and proposed assignment will
            be reviewed by the IESG and appropriate IETF WGs (or
            experts, if suitable working groups no longer exist) to
            ensure that the proposed assignment will not negatively
            impact interoperability or otherwise extend IETF protocols
            in an inappropriate or damaging manner.

            To ensure adequate community review, such documents are
            shepherded through the IESG as AD-sponsored (or WG)
            documents with an IETF Last Call.


Regards,
 Roland