Issue 72, was: Status of IANA Considerations (registrations and registries) -- issues 40, 59, 72, 79

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> ...
>> C. Request Method registry: 
>> <http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/72>
>>
>> That registry currently doesn't exist, but I believe it should, and 
>> belongs into Part 2. So:
>>
>> 4) Should we add a registration procedure similar to the one used for 
>> status codes?
> 
> Yes.
> ...

Note: if we define a new registry we will also have to supply the 
initial content for the registry, which in turn means we need to 
reference all applicable RFCs defining new methods.

I don't have a problem with that, but thought I should mention it before 
adding references to RFC4918, RFC3253 etc..

The alternative would be to move the HTTP Method Name Registry into a 
separate document.

BR, Julian