Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-tls-16: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-tls/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sections 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5 create new IANA registries that all want to use Expert Review as a registration policy. "Expert Review" is defined in Section 4.5 of RFC8126, which says: The required documentation and review criteria, giving clear guidance to the designated expert, should be provided when defining the registry. It is particularly important to lay out what should be considered when performing an evaluation and reasons for rejecting a request. It is also a good idea to include, when possible, a sense of whether many registrations are expected over time, or if the registry is expected to be updated infrequently or in exceptional circumstances only. I don't see any of that material in this document. Did I miss it? Do we not need it? _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
