Re: Further discussion about IANA Considerations for MIBs

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>]

Hi -

> From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
> To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
> Cc: "RFC Editor" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>; "Mreview (E-mail)" <mreview@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 2:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Further discussion about IANA Considerations for MIBs
>

> On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-07.txt
> > says that the IANA considerations section is optional.  Will this be updated?
> > I worry that the chasm between 2223bis and reality is becoming large.
> > (Witness recent discussions on wgchairs list about IPR-related boilerplate).
>
> Maybe I read it wrong, but my understanding is that 2223bis requires
> an IANA Considerations section only when a new namespace is defined,
> in accord with RFC 2434.

If we're *always* supposed to include an IANA considerations section
(even if it will be deleted during the publication process), then I see
that as a change to 2223bis.

> As I understand it, this does not not necessarily conflict with the
> stuff in ID-nits and its successor ID-Checklist, because those
> documents specify requirements for Internet-Drafts, and not all
> of those requirements apply to published RFCs.
...

To be maximally useful, 2223bis needs to let authors/editors know
what to do, and not just document what documents will look like after the
RFC editor is finished with them.  To me this means providing a little
guidance for sections that are mandatory but deleted upon publication.

Randy