RE: thoughts on documentation reuse.

[Randy Presuhn <rpresuhn@dorothy.bmc.com>]

[ post by non-subscriber ]

Hi -

> Message-ID: <D77353F1D8FCD411AC3400105A640BB57107E0@es01-sjc.bmc.com>
> From: "Ayers, Mike" <Mike_Ayers@bmc.com>
> To: sming@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: thoughts on documentation reuse.
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 13:07:08 -0600
...
> 	You've got me here.  However, I think that we need to press for the
> creation of a new process.  IANA is for maintaining relatively trivial
> updates, and I don't think TCs are quite that.  I'd prefer to see a process
> that requires WG review, but takes only about 1-2 months to complete and
> doesn't require charter work (go straight into Last Call?).  I think that
> such a process could unclog a number of pipes (SNMP encryption algorithms
> spring immediately to mind).  If such a thing is impossible, I think I could
> be convinced to support the IANA thing.
...

This is exactly what the "IANA Considerations" section of a
document is for, and this would seem to be well within the
range of possibilities for technical review of registration
requests provided for in RFC 2434.

 ------------------------------------------------------
 Randy Presuhn          BMC Software, Inc.  1-3141
 randy_presuhn@bmc.com  2141 North First Street
 Tel: +1 408 546-1006   San José, California 95131  USA
 ------------------------------------------------------
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.
 ------------------------------------------------------