[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: IANA document



(1) ??? In some sense the IETF has ENORMOUS experience with Expert Review. That was the policy for essentially all parameters before the death of Jon Postel. He was the sole Expert.

An expert is expected to be familiar with the protocol and the protocol parameter space situation and would apply increasingly stringent criteria as the space gets exhausted.

(2) I can't understand why there are argument about "Specification Required" as defined in RFC 2434. It says

      Specification Required - Values and their meaning must be
           documented in an RFC or other permanent and readily available
           reference, in sufficient detail so that interoperability
           between independent implementations is possible.

Which is clearly NOT restricted to RFCs. A public domain and widely distributed document from some company describing their privately developed foo option would quality.

Donald
===========================================================
 Donald E. Eastlake III       Donald.Eastlake@Motorola.com
 Motorola Laboratories               1-508-786-7554 (work)
 111 Locke Drive                     1-508-634-2066 (home)
 Marlboro, MA 01752 USA

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com [mailto:owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:45 PM
To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: Re: IANA document 
>>>>> "Theodore" == Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> writes:
    Theodore> My understanding was that an Expert represented a much higher
    Theodore> bar, because human is in the loop.  My assumption was that an
    Theodore> Expert would 

  Specification Required involves the RFC-editor, or possibly another
peer-reviewed journal. I think that this is a much higher bar.

  The only category that is mechanical would be First-Come/First-Served.

  I don't think that that IETF has a lot of experience with expert review yet.
  And, while the expert may ask to see a specification, (not necessary
though), the specification may be proprietary, require NDA, specific-national
security clearance, etc.

  So, expert review does not, in my opinion, mean that we get any
specifications to look at. It just avoids silly stuff.

    Theodore> Actually, anything permanent will qualify.  So any crackpot
    Theodore> idea in a raduate student's thesis, or a Technical Report
    Theodore> published by a lab might be enough to get a number assigned.

  I don't read 2434 as saying that it is that wide open.
  You may be correct though.
  
    Theodore> publishes a single paper that consumes half a dozen or more
    Theodore> payload id's.  Presumably that would be a case where an human
    Theodore> expert would hopefully say, hey now, wait a moment!

  True. 

]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson,    Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@xelerance.com      http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [