Proposal to remove Preferred-Value field for region YU in LTRU
doug at ewellic.org
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 ietf.org as a WG last call
> (4) add the comment later via a registry request to ietf-languages
at iana.org 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 ietf.org 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
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
More information about the Ietf-languages