Re: "default" IANA policy

[Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>]

Thomas,

  Thanks. This is the case with BGP attribute types.
  I think we should fix this...

-- 
Alex

Tuesday, April 1, 2003, 9:43:22 AM, Thomas Narten wrote:
>> Do we have some sort of default policy when
>> IANA manages a registry, but the allocation policy
>> is not spelled out?

>>From RFC 2434:

>>  5.  Applicability to Past and Future RFCs
>> 
>>    For all existing RFCs that either explicitly or implicitly rely on
>>    the IANA to evaluate assignments without specifying a precise
>>    evaluation policy, the IANA will continue to decide what policy is
>>    appropriate. The default policy has been first come, first served.
>>    Changes to existing policies can always be initiated through the
>>    normal IETF consensus process.
>> 
>>    All future RFCs that either explicitly or implicitly rely on the IANA
>>    to register or otherwise manage assignments MUST provide guidelines
>>    for managing the name space.

> Note that the IANA has leeway to ask for advice if it is worried or
> has questions (this has always been the case for IANA when guidelines
> were not written down). So if we think some name spaces are problems
> that need fixing, we can advise IANA to go slow and at the same time
> go fix things up properly (i.e., by creating a new IANA considerations
> document).

> Thomas