Re: [iri] #97: Provisional schemes de-asssignment

#97: Provisional schemes de-asssignment

Changes (by masinter@…):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => invalid


Comment:

 RFC 4395 has an explicit process for transitioning to "Historical", so the
 statement "RFC 4395 says nothing about this" is confusing.

 Frank's email to the uri-review list
 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review/current/msg01530.html
 says "IESG (the transition from a "provisional" to "historical" status is
 not covered by BCP 35 section 5.3"

 but this doesn't seem to be the case,
 5.3.  Change Control
 Transition from 'permanent' to 'historical' status requires IESG
    approval.  Transition from 'provisional' to 'historical' may be
    requested by anyone authorized to update the provisional
    registration.


 Please clarify and re-open if you can elaborate.

-- 
-------------------------+----------------------
 Reporter:  evnikita2@…  |       Owner:
     Type:  enhancement  |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  major        |   Milestone:
Component:  4395bis      |     Version:
 Severity:  -            |  Resolution:  invalid
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+----------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/ticket/97#comment:1>
iri <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/>

Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 01:15:57 UTC