RE: Request for allocation of Tunnel-Type value (fwd)

["Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>]

> As I recall, the intent was to require both the publication of an RFC
> and expert review (preferably by a relevant WG).  "Expert Review" as
> defined in BCP 26 requires neither of these; RFC 3575 seems to imply
> that the former is required in the case of "Expert Review", but not the
> latter.

Here is what RFC 3575 Section 2.1 says:

  For registration requests where a Designated Expert should be
  consulted, the responsible IESG area director should appoint the
  Designated Expert.  The intention is that any allocation will be
  accompanied by a published RFC.  However, the Designated Expert can
  approve allocations once it seems clear that an RFC will be
  published, allowing for the allocation of values prior to the
  document being approved for publication as an RFC.  The Designated
  Expert will post a request to the AAA WG mailing list (or a successor
  designated by the Area Director) for comment and review, including an
  Internet-Draft.  Before a period of 30 days has passed, the
  Designated Expert will either approve or deny the registration
  request, publish a notice of the decision to the AAA WG mailing list
  or its successor, and inform IANA of its decision.  A denial notice
  must be justified by an explanation and, in the cases where it is
  possible, concrete suggestions on how the request can be modified so
  as to become acceptable.



--
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/>