Return-Path: Received: from murder ([unix socket]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Cyrus v2.2.8-Mandrake-RPM-2.2.8-4.2.101mdk) with LMTPA; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:47:23 +0200 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCB3061AFB for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:47:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10571-09 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:47:21 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.4.8 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7DC61AF3 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:47:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DnlHd-0008Hu-I2; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:43:53 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DnlHa-0008Hp-J7 for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:43:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA06302 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:43:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from montage.altserver.com ([63.247.74.122]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DnlhD-0007ES-DT for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 19:10:20 -0400 Received: from i01m-124-26.d4.club-internet.fr ([62.35.167.26] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1DnlHX-0004Na-5p; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:43:47 -0700 Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050630002035.03ed9eb0@mail.jefsey.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 00:43:33 +0200 To: sob@harvard.edu (Scott Bradner), margaret@thingmagic.com From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" In-Reply-To: <20050629220350.7C5313F413F@newdev.harvard.edu> References: <20050629220350.7C5313F413F@newdev.harvard.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: RFC 2434 term "IESG approval" (Re: IANA Action: Assignment of an IPV6 Hop-by-hop Option) X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF-Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at alvestrand.no Dear Scott, RFCs are made to be adapted to needs. The question should be "what do we want?". I think the response is "to experiment". This means that every registry should include an ad-experimendam area. If the experimentation is OK it will permit to document the allocation of a code point without interrupting the experimentation. If the experimenation fails, then who cares? 200 mails on "IESG approval" saved each time. The main characteristics of an experimentation should be: community oriented (not private), reversible, not affecting non participants operations, no acquired rights without community approval, limited scope in time and space. Documentation is of no interest until it succeeds. This should not be confused with a private area: private usage is to be protected/separated from experimentation. jfc At 00:03 30/06/2005, Scott Bradner wrote: > > I agree that this would be a reasonable process, but wouldn't that be > > "IETF Consensus" (an entirely separate choice in RFC 2434 from IESG > > Approval)? _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf