- From: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 11:03:31 +0000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 9 Jan 2011, at 10:20, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 09.01.2011 07:22, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: >> 08.01.2011 19:24, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> On 08.01.2011 16:58, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: >>>> absence of IANA registry for Warning codes, such as for Status codes. >>>> As this message is now sent to httpbis WG mailing list, I ask you if >>>> there is a sense in creating such registry? >>> >>> We might create a registry when/if when there are actually requests >>> for new Warning values. >> However no one can actually do this since there is no such registry. So >> I think there should be the appropriate registry. Will the WG agree with >> me? > > See above: no, *I* don't think we should create a registry at this point. Agreed, we don't need to create a registry until we have something to put in it. If someone writes an I-D that creates additional Warning codes, that same I-D can: 1) Note that a registry needs to be created, or 2) Suggest creating the registry and contain the relevant IANA guidelines etc. In the case of (1) what I would expect is *if* the I-D progresses then at some point in the future before it is sent to IESG, either a) a separate I-D is produced & progressed in parallel to create the registry and IANA guidelines b) the IANA guidelines etc are put in the original I-D (essentially the same as (2) above but the original I-D author does not expend time writing IANA guidelines before receiving feedback on their actual proposal). Ben
Received on Sunday, 9 January 2011 11:04:05 UTC