No it is not a pedantic difference. If it isn't in a registry it didn't happen.
It is like when someone decided to do an April Fools RFC which used a code point in PKIX space that wasn't actually registered with IANA. That caused some real chaos. Protocol matters. And just because IANA does 'assignments' that are not 'registrations' doesn't mean that is right or should continue. On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:56 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote: > On 6 Oct 2016, at 18:09, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Jaap Akkerhuis <j...@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote: >> >>> RFC 3490 does say something about the ACE prefix. >>> >>> It says it has been registered but not where and there is no IANA >>> >> registry that references RFC3490 >> > > It does not say it was "registered", it says that it was "assigned": > > 11. IANA Considerations > > IANA has assigned the ACE prefix in consultation with the IESG. > > This is not a pedantic difference: IANA keeps registries for things it has > registered. This prefix was assigned by IANA as a neutral body that helped > determine a prefix that was unlikely to have been used in public domain > labels; you can read the mailing list for why that came about that way. > There was no registry for prefixes because it was a one-off for this RFC > only. That can change in the future, of course. > > --Paul Hoffman >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
