Re: Charlie has submitted a new version of draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2

[Paul Hoffman / VPNC <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>]

At 12:38 PM -0500 1/13/04, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>One change that in the document dependency structure which is present
>in the -12 document is that the IANA considerations section has been
>moved to a separate document which Michael Richardson has been
>developing. 
>
>Do you have an opinion about whether the IANA considerations should be
>kept in a separate document, which would make it easier for the IANA
>to review (and which truly isn't really necessary for implementors to
>see), or whether it should be combined into one document (which is
>already 102 pages and over 250k long)?  It seemed to us that it might
>make more sense for the IANA considerations to be in a separate
>informational RFC, but there are certainly arguments to do things
>either way.

Why do you want the IANA Considerations document to be an RFC at all? 
It is meant as *one-time* advice to IANA about what to do when the 
IKEv2 document becomes a Proposed Standard. Michael's document should 
remain an Internet Draft until IANA needs it, and it should then 
disappear after IANA uses it.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium