Re: draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-01.txt - registry of operator name prefixes?

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>]

Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> Description of issue: operator name prefix space must be properly defined
> Submitter name: Joel M. Halpern
> Submitter email address: joel@stevecrocker.com
> Date first submitted: 18-November-2004
> Reference:
> Document: draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-01.txt
> Comment type: T
> Priority: 1
> Section: 5.1 & 11
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:  Operator-prefixes are defined.  
> Creation rules and a registry must be defined
> Length description of problem:
>     Section 5.1 states that only the listed operator name prefixes may 
> be used. It then states that other operator name prefixes may come into 
> existence.  Thus, it is creating a registry, presumably with some 
> expectation on rules for how prefixes get into that registry.
>     However, the IANA considerations section (11) does not even mention 
> the three allocated values.  No section describes how new values may be 
> created, or what rules such new values must abide by.
>
> Requested change:
>     The document should properly define the registry it is creating.

Agreed.

--Jari

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>