Proposal to remove Preferred-Value field for region YU in LTRU

Doug Ewell doug at
Mon Feb 23 06:11:15 CET 2009

Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:

> Four possible tracks come to mind:
>    (1) don't do the comment
>    (2) add the comment now via a registry request to ietf-languages
>    (3) add the comment through ltru at as a WG last call
>    (4) add the comment later via a registry request to ietf-languages
         at after the registry has been updated
> (2) doesn't make much sense.
> I can say that at least one of the ltru co-chairs would be quite ill-
> disposed towards adding an issue for (3) at this particular point in
> time, since, as a matter of consistency, it would require generating
> other comments for other registry entries. (However, if anyone wants
> to pursue such a course of action, the place to do it is on the ltru
> at mailing list, not here.)

No action ever requires generating other comments for other entries. 
Comments are always totally optional.

> Consequently, I would suggest that those who think there is good
> reason to add such comments to the registry wait until the entries
> that they think will benefit from such commentary have actually been
> updated.

If you really want to split this operation into two, one for removing 
the Preferred-Value and the other for adding the comment -- despite John 
Cowan's observation about sending IANA a replacement Registry which we 
know we will immediately want to amend -- then I will leave out the 
comment and let this group decide whether to add it after RFC 4646bis is 

At least we appear to have achieved consensus on removing the 
Preferred-Value for 'YU'.  Four participants in favor and none opposed 
(including the Reviewer, excluding Randy and me) seems fairly decisive.

Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14  ˆ 

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list