Re: 4395bis: inconsistent registration procedure

* Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
><hat type='individual'/>
>
>Section 6.1 of 4395bis states:
>
>   The registration process is an optional mailing list
>   review, followed by "Expert Review".
>
>Yet Section 6.2 states:
>
>   Someone wishing to register a new URI/IRI scheme MUST [...]
>
>   3.  Send a copy of the template or a pointer to the containing
>       document (with specific reference to the section with the
>       template) to the mailing list uri-review@ietf.org, requesting
>       review.
>
>Is the mailing list review optional or mandatory?

RFC 4395 had it somewhere inbetween, with the equivalent of 6.2 saying
the above is a SHOULD and I note that the "optional" is lowercase, which
I would have taken to mean expert reviewers would insist on mailing list
reviews for "important" and "possibly controversial" proposals, but in
some cases they might feel it's not really necessary, so given that the
SHOULD has already been turned into a MUST, I would think this is no
longer optional. Section 8 would also have to be fixed if the Working
Group agrees to require mailing list review.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 21:55:20 UTC